Information about double-celling in DOCS’ custody
This memorandum contains information about double-celling, double-bunking and overcrowding
in prisons. Please note that there are somewhat different regulations and issues pertaining to inmates who
are double-celled while in general population, as contrasted to those who are double-celled while in
keeplock/SHU status. There are, however, some similar issues. We do not enclose information about how
to bring a lawsuit to challenge your status.
Double celling for general population inmates
Double-celling is now permitted as set forth in the enclosed regulations promulgated by the
Department of Correctional Services and the State Commission of Corrections. If these regulations are
being violated, you can file a grievance challenging their implementation. Once you have exhausted your
administrative remedies (by taking your grievance to the Central office level) you may be able to
challenge the implementation of these regulations by an Article 78 proceeding.
Double-celling issues generally
First, you should read the regulations closely that are applicable to your situation (which depends
if you are in general population or in an S-block). If these regulations are being violated, please let us
know and we may be able to contact the facility. Please be as specific as possible in describing the
problems. Because of staff shortages we will not necessarily be able to contact DOCS on your behalf.
We will only do so if you have a serious and ongoing problem and if our staffing permits us to do so.
Second, we are aware of situations where inmates do not object to being double-celled, but object
to their specific cell mate. If you believe you are at risk from your cell mate, you should file a grievance
immediately, setting forth the reasons why you believe you are in danger, such as citing specific threats
that you have received. (Also, if you are in general population, you should, again, check the regulations to
see if they are being followed as there are some limitations on the background and status of which
inmates can be double-celled.) . If you do not receive a timely and adequate response, please let us know
the details of your situation. Again, we will only contact DOCS if you have a serious and ongoing
problem and if our staffing permits us to do so. Because of staffing shortages, you should not wait to
contact us but should advise DOCS immediately if you believe you are at risk.
The law on double celling
We are enclosing some general information about the issue of overcrowding in prisons and jails.

You should note that it is difficult to challenge overcrowding successfully. See Rhodes v. Chapman. In
addition, you should look at the 1998 opinion in Bolton v. Goord, 992 F. Supp. 604 (S.D.N.Y. 1998), in
which the court rejected a challenge by inmates at Woodbourne Correctional Facility, a medium-security
facility, to DOCS’s policy of double celling.
We are enclosing some general information about the issue of overcrowding in prisons and jails.
You should note that it is difficult to challenge overcrowding successfully. See Rhodes v. Chapman. In
addition, you should look at the 1998 opinion in Bolton v. Goord, 992 F. Supp. 604 (S.D.N.Y. 1998), in
which the court rejected a challenge by inmates at Woodbourne Correctional Facility, a medium-security
facility, to DOCS’s policy of double celling. In May 2006, a class-action lawsuit was decided by the
Southern District of New York, rejecting the plaintiffs’ challenge to double-celling on First Amendment
and Eighth Amendment grounds. Jones v. Goord, 435 F. Supp. 2d 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2006). The class
members claimed that double-celling violated the Eighth Amendment rights of any inmate housed in a
double-cell, by placing them at greater risk of inmate-on-inmate assault and cancer from being exposed to
second-hand smoke. The class members claimed that their First Amendment rights were violated by
virtue of the double-celling’s effect on their freedom of religion-- specifically, that the greater burden of
double-celling on the practice of Islam violated their First Amendment rights. The suit failed at the
summary judgment stage, because the plaintiffs: 1) had not presented any evidence that they were at
greater risk of physical harm, 2) had not shown a direct enough effect between the double-celling and a
restriction on ability to practice religion, and 3) had not presented any evidence that they were widely
burdened in their religious exercise.
The class in Jones v. Goord was composed of everyone who is, has been, or will ever be double
celled at any of 13 DOCS maximum-security facilities: Attica, Auburn, Clinton, Coxsackie, Downstate,
Eastern, Elmira, Great Meadow, Green Haven, Shawangunk, Sing Sing, Sullivan, and Wende. Thus, the
decision does not cover inmates housed at Bedford Hills, Five Points, Southport, or Upstate. However, if
a comparable suit was brought by inmates from those facilities the Jones case would be a strong precedent
against their success.
For your convenience, we are enclosing information on filing a federal lawsuit challenging
double celling. With respect to filing a federal lawsuit, be aware that you should read the enclosed memo
describing the Prison Litigation Reform Act, a statute affecting the filing of federal lawsuits, as there may
be important consequences to you in filing such a lawsuit. These include limitations on when you can file
such a lawsuit (only after you exhaust administrative remedies by filing a grievance and appealing it to
Central Office), how much it will cost you (you will have to pay the filing fee if you have any funds even
if you are granted in forma pauperis status), and on your ability to proceed in forma pauperis (without
prepayment of fees) if you have filed cases that have been dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or failed to
state a claim. As noted above, you can also challenge your double celling as contrary to regulation or as
arbitrary and capricious under State law in an Article 78 proceeding. In order to do so, you would again
need to have exhausted your administrative remedies. We enclose information on Article 78 proceedings,
please let us know. Finally, you can try to bring a lawsuit for damages based on a State law cause of
action in the Court of Claims. If you would like information on the Court of Claims, please let us know.
Please be aware that the Prisoners’ Rights Project will not be able to represent you in any lawsuit
you may decide to file. Our office is a small test-case unit of the Legal Aid Society, and we focus our
limited resources on class action litigation challenging unconstitutional conditions of confinement in New
York City jails and New York State prisons. Moreover, we are not permitted to make a referral to a
private attorney.

Double celling for keeplock/SHU inmates

Many inmates in keeplock/SHU are now double-celled, in the “S-block” units. We also enclose a
copy of two letters that we sent to the Department of Correctional Services regarding some of the issues
raised about these S-block units. In those letters we focused on those areas in which there appeared to be
discrepancies between the SHU directive and S-block institutional orders, including raising the issue of
the transfer of inmates to these S-block units who have been sentenced only to keeplock status. We also
wrote about the failure to provide confidentiality in medical encounters. Since that time, however, DOCS
has promulgated revised rules and regulations, a copy of which are enclosed. These changes address
many of these issues that we raised in our letters. In addition, we have received a response from the
Department of Correctional Services to our letters.

In all of the areas that we raised in our letters to DOCS, the law is not clear, and we do not
know whether any of these arguments would be successful if litigated. Even without the revisions to
the NYCRR, it appeared under 7 NYCRR § 253.7(a)(1)(iii) that an inmate could be sentenced to
keeplock admission but confined in a special housing unit (“confinement to a special housing unit under
keeplock admission”). In addition, Department of Correctional Services’ Directive 4933, concerning
Special Housing Units, states that an inmate in a medium security facility may be admitted to an SHU
at that facility as a keeplock admission. Directive 4933 at §III.E.1. Moreover, under this revision, at 7
NYCRR Section 301.6, an inmate in a medium or minimum security facility may be admitted to a
special housing unit for confinement pursuant to a disciplinary hearing. Finally, under 7 NYCRR
Section 301.6, an inmate in a medium or minimum security correctional facility or Upstate Correctional
Facility can be housed in a special housing unit for reasons including while awaiting disposition of a
Tier II or Tier III disciplinary hearing, or for confinement pursuant to a Tier II or Tier III disciplinary
hearing. Also, under the revisions to the NYCRR, medical encounters must be kept confidential only
“to the extent consistent with the safety and good order of the facility.” 7 NYCRR section 304.4(3).
You should read the revised rules carefully as they, unfortunately, make several changes about
which we have received complaints. Not only do they have some impact on the issue of keeplock status
(as contrasted with SHU) and medical confidentiality as described above but, for example, under the
revised regulations, 7 NYCRR 303.1(a), the 30 day period before which some “privileges” are provided
has been changed. It now reads so that the 30 day period must be completed at Southport or at a
double-celled SHU, even if an inmate has already concluded a 30 day satisfactory adjustment period at
another facility. There are many changes that affect life in these S-blocks so, again, please read these
revised rules carefully. If you were to bring a lawsuit about these issues, a legal challenge based on the
type of argument we made in our letter to DOCS would probably most appropriately be pursued via an
Article 78 proceeding, for example by alleging that the S-block institutional orders go beyond the scope
of DOCS’ authority.
We hope the enclosed information is helpful.

enc: Excerpt from Self Help Litigation Manual at 4th ed., pages 19-22
Section 1983 information
PLRA information
Article 78 proceedings
Letters to DOCS dated 8/18/98 and 12/4/98
Regulations re double celling: 9 NYCRR Sections 7621.5-7, 7 NYCRR §1701.1-7; 7
NYCRR Sections 253.7, 301.6, 304.4

NEW YORK CODES, RULES AND REGULATIONS
*** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS CHANGES RECEIVED THROUGH JULY 18, 2003 ***
TITLE 9. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
SUBTITLE AA. STATE COMMISSION OF CORRECTION
CHAPTER V. MINIMUM STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT OF STATE
CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
PART 7621. MAXIMUM FACILITY CAPACITY
9 NYCRR § 7621.5 (2003)
§ 7621.5<dividual occupancy housing units
<< An individual occupancy housing unit is a housing unit with an individually controlled locking device secured
from inmate access equipped to accommodate one inmate. Each individual occupancy housing unit shall contain
at least 60 square feet of floor space; however, an individual occupancy housing unit may contain less than 60
square feet of floor space if such unit was originally constructed for single occupancy or has been rated for single
occupancy by the commission.
(b) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (c) of this section, each individual occupancy housing unit
shall contain:
(1) one bed and mattress;
(2) one functioning toilet; and
(3) one functioning sink.
(c) The equipment required pursuant to subdivision (b) of this section may be modified or excluded for
individual occupancy housing units used for short term medical/ mental health observation of inmates when the
presence of such equipment may pose a threat to such inmates or to the safety or security of the facility.
(d) At least one functioning shower shall be available for each tier or section of individual occupancy housing
units.
(e) Each individual occupancy housing unit shall house only one inmate.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § 45(6)
HISTORY:
<umbered 7621.4 to be 7621.5 on 9/03/97; amended 7621.5 (a) on 9/03/97.

9 NYCRR § 7621.6 (2003)
§ 7621.6<uble occupancy housing units originally designated for individual occupancy
<< A double occupancy housing unit originally designated for individual occupancy is a housing unit with an
individually controlled locking device secured from inmate access that was originally designated for individual
occupancy and which is equipped to accommodate two inmates. Each double occupancy housing unit originally
designated for individual occupancy shall provide a minimum of 23 square feet of floor space per inmate.
(b) Each double occupancy housing unit originally designated for individual occupancy shall house no more
than two inmates.
(c) Each double occupancy housing unit originally designated for individual occupancy shall contain the
following:
(1) one functioning toilet;
(2) one functioning sink;

(3) one bed and mattress for each inmate; and
(4) one safe storage area for each inmate.
(d) At least one functioning shower shall be available for each tier or section in which double occupancy
housing units originally designated for individual occupancy are located.
(e) In determining which inmates will be assigned to double occupancy housing units originally designated
for individual occupancy, the department shall first consider those inmates newly transferred into the facility
where units have been established.
(f) Each inmate shall undergo a screening and risk assessment, including a review of medical records, prior to
being assigned to a double occupancy housing unit originally designated for individual occupancy. Only those
inmates determined by the department to be suitable shall be assigned to double occupancy housing units
originally designated for individual occupancy. The department shall adopt regulations setting forth the standards
for determining an inmate’s suitability for assignment to a double occupancy housing unit originally designated
for individual occupancy. Such standards shall include, but not be limited to, the following factors:
(1) the physical characteristics of the inmate;
(2) the age of the inmate;
(3) the mental state of the inmate;
(4) the health of the inmate;
(5) the inmate’s disciplinary and behavioral record; and
(6) the inmate’s criminal history and the nature of the offense(s) for which the inmate is currently
incarcerated.
(g) An inmate designated as OMH level I shall not be assigned to a double occupancy housing unit originally
designated for individual occupancy.
(h) If an inmate is determined to be suitable for assignment to a double occupancy housing unit originally
designated for individual occupancy, such inmate shall receive a physical assessment by facility health care staff
prior to or within 48 hours of actual placement in a double occupancy housing unit.
(i) Only those inmates determined by the department to be compatible shall be housed together in a double
occupancy housing unit originally designated for individual occupancy. The department shall adopt regulations
setting forth standards for selecting which inmates of those determined to be suitable are to be housed together in
a double occupancy housing unit originally designated for individual occupancy. Such standards shall include, but
not be limited to, the following factors:
(1) whether two inmates have requested to be housed together;
(2) the ethnic and religious backgrounds of the inmates;
(3) the age of the inmates;
(4) the physical size of the inmates;
(5) the length of time left to be served by the inmates;
(6) the program or job assignment of the inmates;
(7) whether there is a familial relationship between the inmates;
(8) whether the inmates smoke; and
(9) known enemies of record.
(j) Inmates shall be moved on the basis of seniority from double occupancy housing units originally
designated for individual occupancy to individual or multiple occupancy housing units as such units become
available; subject however to the facility’s needs and the program assignments of the affected inmates. No inmate
shall be confined in a double occupancy housing unit originally designated for individual occupancy for a period
of more than 60 days unless such inmate volunteers to remain in such unit for a longer period of time. At the
expiration of the 60 days, if an inmate does not volunteer to remain in a double occupancy housing unit originally
designated for individual occupancy he shall be moved to an individual or multiple occupancy housing unit at
either his current facility or a new facility.
(k) No individual occupancy housing unit may be converted by the department to a double occupancy
housing unit originally designated for individual occupancy without the approval of the commission. The factors
the commission shall consider in determining whether to approve the conversion of an individual occupancy
housing unit to a double occupancy housing unit originally designated for individual occupancy shall include, but
not be limited to, the following:
(1) the proximity of the unit to a security station or to security staff;
(2) whether the unit will comply with the requirements of subdivisions (a), (b), (c), and (d) of this section;

Page 6
9 NYCRR ‘ 7621.6
and
(3) the effect conversion will have on the facility’s ability to provide programs and services.
(1) If the commission approves conversion of an individual occupancy housing unit to a double occupancy
housing unit originally designated for individual occupancy, the department shall reformulate the affected
facility’s maximum facility capacity consistent with sections 7621.9 and 7621.10 of this Part.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § 45(6)
HISTORY:
<umbered 7621.5 to be 7621.6 on 9/03/97; added 7621.6 on 9/03/97; redesignated 7621.6 to be 7621.6-a on
1/17/01; amended 7621.6-a on 1/17/01.

9 NYCRR § 7621.7 (2003)
§ 7621.7<uble occupancy housing units originally designated and constructed for double occupancy
<< A double occupancy housing unit originally designated and constructed for double occupancy is a housing unit
with an individually controlled locking device secured from inmate access that was originally designated and
constructed to accommodate two inmates. Each double occupancy housing unit originally designated and
constructed for double occupancy shall provide a minimum of 50 square feet of floor space per inmate.
(b) Each double occupancy housing unit originally designated and constructed for double occupancy shall
house no more than two inmates.
(c) Each double occupancy housing unit originally designated and constructed for double occupancy shall
contain the following:
(1) one functioning toilet;
(2) one functioning sink; and
(3) one bed and mattress for each inmate.
(d) Each inmate housed in a double occupancy housing unit originally designated and constructed for double
occupancy shall have available one safe storage area.
(e) At least one functioning shower shall be available for each tier or section in which double occupancy
housing units originally designated and constructed for double occupancy are located.
(f) Each inmate shall undergo a screening and risk assessment, including a review of medical records, prior to
being assigned to a double occupancy housing unit originally designated and constructed for double occupancy.
Only those inmates determined by the department to be suitable shall be assigned to double occupancy housing
units originally designated and constructed for double occupancy. The department shall adopt written policies ad
procedures, which shall be filed with the commission, setting forth the standards for determining an inmate’s
suitability for assignment to a double occupancy housing unit originally designated and constructed for double
occupancy. Such standards shall include, but not be limited to, the following factors:
(1) the physical characteristics of the inmate;
(2) the mental state of the inmate;
(3) the health of the inmate;
(4) the inmate’s disciplinary and behavioral record; and
(5) the inmate’s criminal history and the nature of the offense(s) for which the inmate is currently
incarcerated.
(g) An inmate designated as OMH level I shall not be assigned to a double occupancy housing unit originally
designated and constructed for double occupancy.
(h) Only those inmates determined by the department to be compatible shall be housed together in a double
occupancy housing unit originally designated and constructed for double occupancy. The department shall adopt
written policies and procedures, which shall be filed with the commission, setting forth standards for selecting
which inmates of those determined to be suitable are to be housed together in a double occupancy housing unit
originally designated and constructed for double occupancy. Such standards shall include, but not be limited to,
the following factors:
(1) the ethnic and religious backgrounds of the inmates;

(2) the physical capabilities of the inmates;
(3) whether the inmates smoke; and
(4) known enemies of record.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § 45(6)
HISTORY:
<ed 7621.7 on 1/17/01.

TITLE 7. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
CHAPTER X. FACILITY ADMINISTRATION
PART 1701. DOUBLE-CELL HOUSING IN EXISTING CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
7 NYCRR § 1701.1 (2003)
@ 1701.1<rpose
<<provide protocols for the management of double-cell housing constructed before 1996 in existing maximum
and medium security facilities where approval has been granted by the State Commission of Correction (SCOC).
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § 112
HISTORY:
Added 1701.1 on 9/03/97.

7 NYCRR § 1701.2 (2003)
@ 1701.2<finitions
<<used in this Part, double-cell housing shall mean a maximum or medium security cell (i.e., an individual selfcontained space with a controlled locking device secured from inmate access) originally designated to
accommodate a single inmate that has been equipped to accommodate two inmates and has been inspected and
approved by the SCOC for conversion to double-cell use.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § 112
HISTORY:
Added 1701.2 on 9/03/97.

7 NYCRR § 1701.3 (2003)
@ 1701.3<ll Selection
<< The commissioner or deputy commissioner for correctional facilities shall establish the specific number of
proposed double-cells within a correctional facility.
(b) The Superintendent shall designate specific cells within the facility for proposed conversion to double-cell
housing. Such cells should be distributed as evenly as possible between cell tiers in general population and located
as close to an officer’s station as feasible. Cells within designated special housing units may not be considered for
double-cell housing without approval from the commissioner or deputy commissioner for correctional facilities.
(c) Upon approval by the commissioner or deputy commissioner for correctional facilities, the facility doublecell housing plan shall be submitted for authorization to the SCOC in accordance with Part 7621 of this Title.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § 112
HISTORY:

Added 1701.3 on 9/03/97.

7 NYCRR § 1701.4 (2003)
1701.4<uble-cell housing equipment
<< Inmates assigned to double-cell housing shall be afforded all rights and privileges specified in Part 1704 of this
Title, except that the equipment provided in a double-cell shall be in accordance with this section.
(b) Each double-cell shall contain:
(1) Lighting equal to at least 20 foot candles at desk level and in the personal grooming area (each cell will be
equipped with one permanent light fixture and, if electrical capacity permits, one clip-on light for the bottom bunk
bed);
(2) One sink;
(3) One toilet;
(4) One bed, mattress and pillow for each inmate;
(5) One locker for each inmate;
(6) One audio signal “splitter” for those cells equipped with a functioning audio outlet; and
(7) One bar of antibacterial soap for each inmate, in addition to personal hygiene items and flatwork normally
provided.
(c) In double-cells less than eighty (80) square feet:
(1) the cells shall also contain one electric fan (plastic casing and blades), electrical capacity permitting; and
(2) inmates shall be permitted to place a privacy curtain, approved by the deputy superintendent of security,
between the toilet and bed while the toilet is in use. The curtain shall not obstruct the view of either inmate from
the front of the cell.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § 112
Added 1701.4 on 9/03/97; amended 1701.4(a) on 9/05/01.

7 NYCRR § 1701.5 (2003)
§ 1701.5<lection of Inmates for Double-cell housing
<< Responsibility. The deputy superintendent of security shall be responsible for the selection of inmates for
double-cell housing. The deputy superintendent of security or designee shall conduct a risk assessment using the
eligibility, suitability and compatibility criteria set forth in subdivisions (b), (c) and (d) of this section.
(b) Eligible Population. In determining which inmates shall be considered for assignment to double-cell
housing, the facility shall first consider those inmates newly transferred into the facility; provided, however:
(1) an inmate temporarily moved to attend an outside court, a death bed/funeral visit or to receive outside
medical/psychiatric treatment may not be assigned to double-cell housing upon return to the facility, unless the
inmate was assigned to double-cell housing prior to such move; or
(2) a general population inmate transferred for non-disciplinary reasons may not be assigned to double-cell
housing in general confinement at the receiving facility, if the inmate meets all of the following criteria:
(i) the inmate has been with the department for at least two years following initial reception/classification and
transfer to a permanent facility;
(ii) the inmate has had no Tier II or III disciplinary determinations of guilt within the last two years;
(iii) the inmate has not volunteered for double-cell housing (a transfer sought by an inmate may be
conditioned upon the inmate volunteering to be housed in a double-cell at the receiving facility); and
(iv) the inmate is not being transferred to Woodbourne Correctional Facility.
(c) Assessment of Suitability.
(1) Information Assessment. When determining an inmate’s suitability for a double-cell assignment, the
deputy superintendent of security or designee shall review the information contained in the inmate population

management system and other records as deemed appropriate to determine if factors exist that would preclude
such assignment.
(2) Physical status.
(i) Size. Any inmate over 6’5” or currently weighing over 299 pounds shall be precluded from a double-cell
assignment.
(ii) Age. Except for volunteers, any inmate 70 years of age or over shall be precluded from a double-cell
assignment.
(iii) Health. Any inmate with a communicable disease or physical disability who facility medical staff
conclude should not be housed in a double-cell, based on screening, see paragraph (6) of this subdivision, shall be
precluded from a double-cell assignment (e.g., confinement to a wheelchair or receiving “directly observed
therapy” for treatment of Tuberculosis - so long as the inmate is on active treatment).
(3) Mental Status.
(i) Level 1. Any inmate currently classified as Level 1 by OMH staff shall be precluded from a double-cell
assignment;
(ii) Levels 2 and 3. If an inmate is classified as Level 2 or 3 by Office of Mental Health (“OMH”) staff, the
inmate’s record must be closely scrutinized prior to assignment to a double-cell. Factors that may preclude such
an assignment would be:
(a) Extremely poor disciplinary adjustment;
(b) Input from OMH staff specifically recommending a single-cell assignment; or
(c) Any other documented behavior that, when coupled with such OMH designation, would lead the deputy
superintendent of security or designee to determine that the inmate would not be an appropriate doublecelling
candidate.
(4) History and Behavior. The following inmates shall not be approved for double-cell housing, except in
accordance with paragraph (5) of this subdivision:
(i) Victim prone. Inmates currently in “voluntary protective custody” or “involuntary protective custody”
status in accordance with Part 330 of this Title. In addition, any inmate with a pattern of being victimized by other
inmates resulting in serious physical injury or sexual abuse;
(ii) Assaultive inmates. Inmates with a pattern of predatory assaults on other inmates by the use of contraband
weapons or where the assaults resulted in serious physical injury to the victims;
(iii) Criminal histories of extreme violence. Inmates whose criminal histories involve a pattern of acts of
violence resulting in serious physical injury to victims, or inmates whose crime(s) of commitment involve acts of
violence resulting in serious physical injuries to multiple victims or intentional and depraved infliction of extreme
physical pain resulting in serious physical injury to any one victim; or
(iv) Homosexual behavior. Inmates found guilty at facility disciplinary hearings of engaging in homosexual
acts while incarcerated.
Note: Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraphs (i) and (iv) of this paragraph, inmates in the special
protective custody unit at Oneida Correctional Facility may be housed together so long as it is determined that the
inmates do not pose a threat to each other.
(5) Since the assessment of an inmate’s ineligibility for double-celling is based upon a history of
demonstrated behavior in paragraph (4) of this subdivision and it is possible for the inmate to positively change
such behavior, the deputy superintendent of security may exercise a limited amount of flexibility when
determining double-cell assignments. For this reason, an “override factor” has been included in the screening
process and may be utilized when more recent history and behavior by the inmate show a positive adjustment
factor mitigating in favor of doublecell housing despite earlier events. Whenever the override factor is utilized, the
deputy superintendent of security must provide the specific reason on the Double-Cell Information Sheet (see
section 1701.9 of this Part.
(6) Medical screening.
(i) Medical records screening. The deputy superintendent of security or designee shall provide a list of
inmates under consideration for double-cell housing to the facility health services director or designee. The
facility health staff shall conduct a medical records review prior to possible double-cell assignment and advise the
deputy superintendent of security or designee of the existence of a medical condition that would preclude doublecell housing, require placement in a bottom bunk bed or require an inmate to be housed in a cell with a
nonsmoker.
(ii) Physical assessment. Either prior to or within forty-eight (48) hours after an inmate’s placement in a

Page 11
7 NYCRR ‘ 1701.5
double-cell, a physical assessment will be conducted. If facility health staff determine that a change in the
inmate’s current housing is required, that information shall be conveyed to the deputy superintendent of security
or designee and the appropriate change in housing shall be made.
(iii) The Form used. The facility health staff shall utilize the Screening and Physical Assessment for
Placement in a Double-Cell form (see section 1701.9 of this Part) when both conducting the medical records
screening review and physical assessment.
(d) Assessment of Compatibility. After an inmate’s record has been appropriately screened and the deputy
superintendent of security or designee has determined that the inmate is a suitable candidate, an assessment of
compatibility with the other inmate assigned to the cell shall be made. The following criteria shall be used in
making this determination:
(1) Volunteers. Whether two inmates have requested to be housed together.
(2) Ethnic or religious background. The facility should attempt to take into account the ethnic and religious
background of both candidates for the same double-cell. It is not necessary, however, that they share the same
ethnic or religious background.
(3) Language. The ability of inmates to communicate with each other.
(4) Size or other physical characteristics. The physical capabilities and needs of inmates (e.g., two inmates
both requiring a bottom bunk should not be housed in the same cell).
(5) Age. The respective ages of the inmates.
(6) Criminal history/length of sentence. Years to earliest release and nature of crimes.
(7) Program/Job assignment. The inmates’ program or job assignments (certain program and job assignments
require inmates to house on the same location).
(8) Family relationship. Familial relationship between inmates (e.g., siblings or cousins).
(9) Known enemies. Inmates who are known enemies of record or who the department has otherwise
determined should be kept apart.
(e) Double-Cell Information Sheet. The list of factors governing both suitability and compatibility is not
exhaustive. Other factors may also be considered. The Double-Cell Information Sheet (see section 1701.9 of this
Part) has been developed to properly record each step in the screening/risk assessment process. Each applicable
section must be completed by the deputy superintendent of security or designee. “Health Service Review Results”
and “Mental Health Status” sections may be completed based on verbal or written input from the appropriate
areas. A copy of the completed form should be forwarded to the inmate records coordinator and the movement
and control officer for each inmate approved for double-celling.
(f) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, no inmate has a right to be housed in a double-cell or
to be housed in a double-cell with a particular inmate. An inmate’s request to be housed in a doublecell or to be
housed in a double-cell with a particular inmate can be denied by the deputy superintendent for security or
designee in the exercise of his or her sound discretion.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § 112
Added 1701.5 on 9/03/97; repealed 1701.5(d)(10) on 9/05/01; added 1701.5(f) on 7/24/02.

7 NYCRR § 1701.6 (2003)
@ 1701.6<rsonal property
<< Inmates will be responsible for proper storage of property and the neat and orderly appearance of their
individual cell space.
(b) Double-cell property limit. Personal property possessed by each inmate in a double-cell shall be limited to
the amount of property that will fit in three standard draft bags (including legal material). Personal property shall
be stored in the individual locker. Any property beyond what can be stored in the individual locker may be stored
in two draft bags provided by the department for storage of property. The floor space under the bottom bunk bed
may be used by both inmates for storage of property. Of the total available space under the bottom bed, the half
closest to the cell door will be utilized by the inmate assigned to the bottom bunk. The remaining space may be
utilized by the inmate assigned to the top bunk.

Page 12
7 NYCRR ‘ 1701.5
(c) Secure area storage. In addition to the property inmates may store in a double-cell, each inmate may elect
to store up to two standard draft bags of personal property in a secure area designated by the Superintendent for
the duration of his/her double-cell assignment. Form #2064 will be utilized to inventory all stored property. Upon
written request, the inmate will be given access to such stored property once every 30 days to withdraw or store
items.
(d) Inmate personal property beyond the amount permitted in the cell and the two bags held in storage, will be
disposed of pursuant to the department’s established procedure regarding the disposal of surplus or disallowed
property.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § 112
HISTORY:
Added 1701.6 on 9/03/97.

7 NYCRR § 1701.7 (2003)
@ 1701.7<vement of Inmates after selection for double-cell housing
<< No inmate may refuse placement in double-cell housing.
(b) The movement of inmates out of double-cell housing shall be the responsibility of the deputy
superintendent of security.
(c) The movement of an inmate out of double-cell housing shall be based upon the length of time in doublecell housing, the needs of the facility, and the inmate’s medical needs, program and work assignments.
(d) No inmate shall be confined in a double-cell for a period of more than sixty (60) days unless such inmate
volunteers to remain in the double-cell for a longer period of time. At the expiration of the 60 days, if an inmate
does not volunteer to remain in a double-cell, the inmate shall be moved to a single-cell or multiple occupancy
housing at either his current facility or a new facility.
(e) Inmates in double-cell housing will be specifically assigned to either the upper or lower bunk and may not
change such assignment without the approval of the deputy superintendent of security or designee. If the lower
bunk was assigned for medical reasons, the DSS or designee shall consult with medical staff before any change.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § 112
HISTORY:
Added 1701.7 on 9/03/97.

NEW YORK CODES, RULES AND REGULATIONS
*** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS CHANGES RECEIVED THROUGH JULY 18, 2003 ***
TITLE 7. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
CHAPTER V. PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING STANDARDS OF INMATE BEHAVIOR AND FOR
GRANTING GOOD BEHAVIOR TIME ALLOWANCES
SUBCHAPTER A. PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING STANDARDS OF INMATE BEHAVIOR
PART 253. DISCIPLINARY HEARING
7 NYCRR § 253.7 (2003)
@ 253.7<spositions and mandatory surcharge
<< Dispositions. (1) Upon affirming a charge, the hearing officer may impose one or more of the following
penalties:
(i) counsel and/or reprimand;
(ii) loss of one or more specified privileges for a period of up to 30 days. Correspondence privileges may not
be withheld; however, visiting privileges may be withheld with a particular person where the inmate has been
involved in improper conduct in connection with visitation with such person. Visiting-related sanctions shall be
imposed only in accordance with the provisions of the penalty chart contained in section 200.5(f) of this Title;
(iii) confinement to a cell or room continuously or to a special housing unit under keeplock admission or on
certain days during certain hours for a period of up to 30 days (See Chapter VI, Part 301, section 301.6);
(iv) restitution for loss or intentional damage to property up to $ 100; or
(v) the imposition of one work task per day other than a regular work assignment for a maximum of seven
days, excluding Sundays and public holidays, to be performed on the inmate’s housing unit or other designated
area. Inmates given such disposition who are participating in a regular work assignment shall not be required to
work more than 8 hours per day. The eight-hour limitation excludes such non-work assignments as educational or
vocational school programming.
(2) Any penalty imposed pursuant to this section shall run consecutively to any other like penalty previously
imposed unless the hearing officer advised the inmate that the penalty shall run concurrently.
(3) Whenever a confinement penalty is being served and a more restrictive confinement penalty is imposed as
a result of another hearing, the more restrictive penalty shall begin to be served immediately, and any time owed
on the less restrictive penalty shall be served after completion of the more restrictive penalty period.
(4) The disciplinary hearing officer may suspend imposition of any penalty for a period of up to 90 days.
Any such suspended penalty may be imposed by a subsequent disciplinary hearing or superintendent’s hearing
officer upon substantiating a charge of misbehavior in a subsequent hearing within a specific period.
(5) As soon as possible, but not later than 24 hours after the conclusion of the hearing, the inmate shall be
given a written statement of the disposition of the hearing. This statement shall set forth the evidence relied upon
by the hearing officer in reaching his decision and also set forth the reasons for any penalties imposed.
(b) Mandatory disciplinary surcharge. Upon the conclusion of a disciplinary hearing wherein the inmate
admits the charges, or where the hearing officer affirms one or more charges, a mandatory disciplinary surcharge
in the amount of $ 5.00 shall be assessed automatically against the inmate.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § § 70, 112, 138 and 146
HISTORY:
Repealed and added 253.7 on 6/10/92; amended 253.7 (a)(3)cl par on 12/15/93; amended 253.7 (a)(1)(ii) on

10/19/94; amended 253.7 (a)(1)(v) on 12/21/94; amended 253.7 (a), (3) on 12/28/94; amended 253.7 (a) (2) on
3/01/95.

NEW YORK CODES, RULES AND REGULATIONS
*** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS CHANGES RECEIVED THROUGH JULY 18, 2003 ***
TITLE 7. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
CHAPTER VI. SPECIAL HOUSING UNITS
SUBCHAPTER D. PROCEDURES FOR GRANTING MERIT TIME
PART 301. SPECIAL HOUSING UNIT ADMISSIONS
7 NYCRR § 301.6 (2003)
§ 301.6<eplock admission
<< An inmate in a medium or minimum security correctional facility or Upstate Correctional Facility may be
housed in a special housing unit for reasons such as, but not limited to, the following:
(1) awaiting disposition of a disciplinary (Tier II) or superintendent’s (Tier III) hearing;
(2) for confinement pursuant to a disposition of a disciplinary (Tier II) or superintendent’s (Tier III) hearing;
or
(3) awaiting transfer to another facility.
(b) An inmate in any correctional facility may be admitted to a special housing unit for confinement pursuant
to a disposition of a disciplinary (Tier II) or a Superintendent’s (Tier III) hearing, where the disposition included a
determination that the inmate violated rule 106.11 (item 270.2(B)(7)(ii) of this Title).
(c) Inmates assigned to keeplock status in a special housing unit pursuant to this section shall be subject to the
property limitations set forth in section 302.2 (a)-(g) of this Title.
(d) Inmates assigned to keeplock status in a special housing unit pursuant to this section shall be, subject to
the visiting conditions set forth in section 302.2(i)(1) of this Title, unless restricted by disciplinary or
administrative action.
(e) Inmates assigned to keeplock status in a special housing unit pursuant to this section shall be subject to the
package limitations set forth in section 302.2(i)(3).
(f) Inmates assigned to keeplock status in a special housing unit pursuant to this section shall have their
commissary privileges suspended pending a determination in a disciplinary proceeding.
(g) Inmates assigned to keeplock status in a special housing unit pursuant to this section shall be subject to the
limitation on telephone calls contained in section 302.2(i)(2) of this Title.
(h) Inmates assigned to keeplock status in a special housing unit pursuant to this section shall be afforded
correspondence privileges as set forth in section 302.2(h) of this Title.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § § 112, 138
Repealed and added 301.6 on 10/12/88; amended 301.6 on 4/18/90; repealed and added 301.6(a) on 10/20/99;
added 301.6(b) on 11/08/00; amended 301.6(g) on 7/28/99; repealed 301.6(h) on 7/28/99; relettered 301.6(b)-(g)
to be (c)-(h) on 11/08/00; amended 301.6(c) on 9/18/02; amended 301.6(d) on 9/18/02; amended 301.6(e) on
9/18/02; amended 301.6(g) on 9/18/02; amended 301.6(h) on 9/18/02.

NEW YORK CODES, RULES AND REGULATIONS
*** THIS DOCUMENT REFLECTS CHANGES RECEIVED THROUGH JULY 18, 2003 ***
TITLE 7. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES

CHAPTER VI. SPECIAL HOUSING UNITS
SUBCHAPTER D. PROCEDURES FOR GRANTING MERIT TIME
PART 304. SERVICES
7 NYCRR § 304.4 (2003)
@ 304.4<dical services
<< A qualified medical practitioner (physician, physician’s assistant, registered nurse) will be required to examine
each inmate upon admission to an SHU in accord with section 302.1(b) of this Title.
(b) A qualified medical practitioner (as listed above) is required to visit the SHU once in every 24-hour period
to examine into the state of health of the inmates confined in such unit.
(c) Sick call will be conducted daily.
(1) The officer in charge will prepare a list of all inmates who request to see a medical practitioner.
(2) Any inmate who requests to see a medical practitioner will be permitted an opportunity to do so in accord
with all good security precautions.
(3) The medical encounter will be recorded in each inmate’s medical file and in the appropriate SHU file.
(d) If an inmate has a medical complaint, requests health services other than at sick call, or a medical
emergency occurs, the facility health services unit will be contacted immediately. The response/action taken by
health services staff shall be logged.
(e) A qualified medical practitioner must examine the state of health of an inmate within 24 hours of the
commencement of any diet restriction, and daily thereafter during the period of the diet restriction.
(f) To the extent consistent with the safety and good order of the facility, staff shall respect an inmate’s right
to privacy during medical encounters and the confidential nature of communications between inmates and health
care providers.
Statutory authority: Correction Law, § § 112, 138
HISTORY:
Repealed and added 304.4 on 10/12/88; amended 304.4(c)(3) on 7/28/99; added 304.4(f) on 7/28/99.