LOVED ONES COALITION

Weekly Oversight Report

Documenting Systemic Violations Across the Federal Bureau of Prisons

February 9, 2026

This report is submitted by the Loved Ones Coalition to document recurring conditions of confinement concerns reported across multiple Bureau of Prisons facilities and regions. The information contained herein reflects corroborated reporting from incarcerated individuals, family members, and individuals with direct knowledge of institutional operations. While the specific facts vary by facility, the patterns identified are consistent and systemic in nature.

Across regions, facilities are reporting prolonged failures in basic life-safety systems, delayed or denied medical care, misuse of restrictive housing in response to medical or environmental crises, and administrative breakdowns that prevent timely resolution of known hazards. These issues do not appear to stem from isolated incidents or individual misconduct alone, but rather from structural deficiencies in oversight, maintenance, staffing, and interdepartmental coordination.

The purpose of this report is not punitive, but preventative. Loved Ones Coalition submits these findings to support transparency, early intervention, and corrective action before conditions escalate into avoidable injury, illness, litigation, or loss of life. Each facility entry is structured to clearly outline reported conditions, applicable policy or statutory standards, systemic concerns, and targeted oversight questions intended to clarify current practices and identify pathways for remediation.

Loved Ones Coalition recognizes the operational complexity of managing federal correctional facilities and submits this report in the interest of partnership, accountability, and shared responsibility for ensuring humane, lawful, and safe conditions of confinement. We are prepared to provide additional documentation through secure channels and to engage constructively with oversight bodies, facility leadership, and relevant agencies to support corrective action while protecting individuals from retaliation.

---

MID-ATLANTIC REGION

USP McCreary (Kentucky) — Systemic Medical Neglect & Disability-Related Failures

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple reports from incarcerated individuals, family members, and individuals with direct knowledge of institutional conditions indicating a persistent pattern of serious medical neglect, inadequate disability accommodation, and delayed or denied clinical escalation at USP McCreary.

Information received reflects recurring institutional failures, not isolated incidents. Reports describe incarcerated individuals with complex and chronic medical conditions—including severe orthopedic injuries, neurological impairment, cancer histories, vascular conditions, seizure activity, and significant mobility limitations—who allegedly experience prolonged delays in care, denial or interruption of prescribed treatment, and lack of appropriate housing or functional accommodations.

Reports further indicate that individuals requiring wheelchairs, assistive devices, or assistance with activities of daily living are routinely left without adequate support. In several instances, medically compromised individuals were reportedly placed in restrictive conditions or left untreated while experiencing escalating pain, progressive loss of function, and visible physical deterioration.

Additional reporting raises concern regarding inadequate response to acute medical events, including seizure activity, as well as breakdowns in continuity of care and specialty referral processes. Collectively, the information suggests a systemic pattern of medical minimization, delayed intervention, and institutional indifference to serious medical needs.

Taken together, these reports indicate a failure of sustained medical oversight and disability accommodation at USP McCreary, placing medically vulnerable individuals at significant risk of permanent harm.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Failure to provide timely and adequate medical care for serious conditions	BOP Program Statement 6031.04 (Patient Care)
Delays or denials in specialty referrals and continuity of treatment	BOP Program Statement 6000.05 (Health Services Administration)
Failure to accommodate mobility impairments and neurological limitations	Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504
Inadequate response to acute medical events (e.g., seizures)	BOP Program Statement 5566.06 (Emergency Medical Response)
Placement of medically vulnerable individuals in restrictive conditions	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference Standard
Systemic indifference to escalating pain and loss of function	28 C.F.R. § 549.70

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “Medical issues keep getting worse, but nothing changes.”
• “People who can’t walk or use their hands properly are left without help.”
• “Specialist care is delayed or denied.”
• “They ignore serious medical problems until it’s too late.”
• “Being sick just gets you locked down instead of treated.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Repeated delay or denial of care for serious, chronic, and progressive medical conditions
• Failure to provide reasonable accommodations for mobility and neurological impairments
• Breakdown in continuity of care and specialty referral pathways
• Inadequate response to acute medical events
• Use of restrictive conditions rather than clinical intervention
• Institutional culture that minimizes or dismisses serious medical complaints

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — USP McCreary (MID-ATLANTIC REGION)

1. What procedures are currently in place at USP McCreary to identify incarcerated individuals with serious, chronic, or progressive medical conditions requiring ongoing or specialty care?
2. How does the facility determine when a medical condition warrants referral to outside specialists, and what safeguards exist to prevent delays or denials in those referrals?
3. What protocols govern continuity of care for individuals with complex medical histories, including cancer treatment, neurological impairment, seizure disorders, or vascular conditions?
4. How does USP McCreary assess and accommodate individuals with significant mobility impairments, including wheelchair use and assistance with activities of daily living?
5. Under what circumstances may an incarcerated individual with documented medical vulnerabilities be placed in restrictive housing, and what medical clearance or review is required prior to such placement?
6. What is the facility’s protocol for responding to seizure activity or other acute medical events, and how is staff compliance with that protocol monitored?
7. What mechanisms are in place to ensure incarcerated individuals can report worsening medical conditions without fear of retaliation or adverse housing consequences?
8. What steps, if any, have been taken to review or address concerns related to delayed treatment, denied medications, or inadequate medical accommodation at USP McCreary?

---

FCC Hazelton / USP Hazelton (West Virginia) — Systemic Medical Lockdowns, Denial of Wound Care, and Acute Care Failures

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple reports from incarcerated individuals, family members, and individuals with direct knowledge of institutional conditions indicating a pattern of medical neglect and delayed acute care at FCC/USP Hazelton that extends beyond isolated incidents or individual decision-making.

Reports describe medically compromised individuals receiving minimal medical supplies without clinical follow-up, including being issued limited gauze and instructed to perform wound care themselves or rely on other incarcerated individuals who are not medically trained. Reporting indicates that during periods of staffing shortages, the medical department is effectively inaccessible, with physicians and nursing staff not conducting in-cell rounds or providing hands-on care.

Information received further indicates that individuals experiencing acute respiratory distress are denied immediate nebulizer or breathing treatments and instead instructed to submit sick call requests and wait for call-outs, even when they report that they are unable to breathe at the time of the request. This practice reportedly results in prolonged untreated symptoms during medical lockdowns.

Additional reports raise concern regarding staff conduct toward individuals seeking care, including statements that shame or discourage medical requests by framing treatment as a financial burden to the facility or the federal government. Collectively, the reporting reflects a systemic environment in which staffing limitations, administrative practices, and staff interactions combine to delay or deny necessary medical care.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Denial or delay of wound care due to staffing shortages	BOP Program Statement 6031.04 (Patient Care)
Delegation of wound care to untrained incarcerated individuals	BOP Health Services Standards
Failure to provide timely nebulizer or respiratory treatments	28 C.F.R. § 549.70
Reliance on sick call procedures for urgent medical needs	BOP Clinical Practice Guidelines
Medical inaccessibility during lockdowns	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference
Staff conduct discouraging care-seeking	BOP Program Statement 3420.11 (Standards of Employee Conduct)

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “They gave him five gauze pads and told him to change it himself or have his cellie do it.”
• “Medical is locked down when they’re short staffed and the doctors and nurses don’t come to the rooms.”
• “He was told to put in a sick call slip, but he couldn’t breathe right then.”
• “Breathing treatments only happen if you can make it to medical.”
• “He was told his medical was costing them too much money and running up bills for the federal government.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Medical services rendered inaccessible during staffing shortages or lockdowns
• Improper delegation of wound care to non-medical individuals
• Failure to distinguish urgent medical needs from routine sick call requests
• Delayed or denied respiratory treatments during acute distress
• Staff interactions that discourage incarcerated individuals from seeking care
• Institutional reliance on staffing limitations as justification for withholding treatment

5. STAFF IDENTIFIED IN REPORTING / TESTIMONY

The following staff members are identified in reporting as having direct involvement in, or association with, the conditions described above:

• Bosch — staff member, FCC/USP Hazelton

• Identified in reporting as having shamed an incarcerated individual for seeking medical care
• Reportedly made cost-based statements characterizing medical treatment as a financial burden
• Hood — staff member, FCC/USP Hazelton
• Identified in reporting as involved in medical-related decisions and communications
• Captain (name not yet provided) — FCC/USP Hazelton
• Identified in reporting as having authority over housing and movement during medical issues
• Dr. Mimms — medical provider, FCC/USP Hazelton
• Identified in reporting in connection with delayed or absent wound care and treatment decisions

(Staff listed as identified by incarcerated individuals and corroborating reports.)

6. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FCC/USP Hazelton (MID-ATLANTIC REGION)

1. How does FCC/USP Hazelton ensure continuity of wound care and respiratory treatment during staffing shortages or medical lockdowns?
2. Under what circumstances are incarcerated individuals instructed to perform their own wound care, and what clinical oversight is required in such situations?
3. How does the facility distinguish between urgent medical needs and routine sick call requests, particularly for respiratory distress?
4. What protocols require medical staff to conduct in-cell rounds for individuals with documented medical needs when the medical department is otherwise inaccessible?
5. What guidance exists regarding staff communications with incarcerated individuals about the cost of medical care, including statements attributed in reporting to Bosch?
6. What roles do custody staff, including the Captain identified in reporting, play in determining access to medical care during lockdowns?
7. How are medical providers, including Dr. Mimms, expected to document and respond to ongoing wound care and respiratory treatment needs?
8. What internal reviews, if any, have been conducted to assess whether staffing shortages are contributing to delayed or denied medical care at FCC/USP Hazelton?

---

FCI Morgantown (West Virginia) — Extreme Cold Exposure & Failure to Maintain Safe Living Conditions

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple reports from family members and individuals with direct knowledge of facility conditions indicating that housing units at FCI Morgantown have been left without adequate heat during extreme winter temperatures, including reported outdoor temperatures reaching approximately –5 degrees Fahrenheit.

Reports indicate that heating systems within the facility are either nonfunctional or not being activated, resulting in incarcerated individuals being forced to remain in freezing indoor conditions for extended periods of time. According to reporting, staff have been made aware of the lack of heat but no meaningful corrective action has been taken.

Exposure to extreme cold is reported to be ongoing rather than temporary, raising concern that incarcerated individuals are being subjected to inhumane living conditions that pose serious risks to health and safety, particularly for those who are elderly, medically vulnerable, or otherwise at increased risk of cold-related injury or illness.

Taken together, the information suggests a systemic failure to maintain basic life-safety standards, including temperature control necessary to ensure humane confinement.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Failure to provide adequate heat during freezing temperatures	18 U.S.C. § 4042(a)(2)
Exposure to extreme cold inside housing units	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference
Failure to maintain safe and humane living conditions	BOP Program Statement 1600.11 (Environmental Health & Safety)
Environmental conditions posing health risks	Life Safety Code / Environmental Health Standards
Staff inaction despite reported conditions	BOP Standards of Employee Conduct

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “The temperatures are –5 degrees and there is no heat in the facility.”
• “Staff know about it, but nothing is being done.”
• “These are inhumane conditions to live in.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Prolonged exposure of incarcerated individuals to freezing indoor temperatures
• Failure to maintain or activate heating systems during extreme weather
• Lack of timely response by staff despite awareness of conditions
• Increased risk of hypothermia, illness, and other cold-related medical complications
• Disregard for basic environmental health and safety standards

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FCI Morgantown (MID-ATLANTIC REGION)

1. What heating systems are currently in place at FCI Morgantown, and were they fully operational during the reported period of extreme cold?
2. What temperature thresholds trigger corrective action or emergency maintenance when indoor housing units fall below safe levels?
3. How does the facility monitor indoor temperatures within housing units during winter months?
4. What steps are taken to protect incarcerated individuals from extreme cold exposure when heating systems are nonfunctional or insufficient?
5. What procedures exist for staff to escalate environmental safety concerns related to temperature control?
6. Were any temporary measures (such as supplemental heat, additional clothing, or alternative housing) implemented during the reported cold conditions?
7. How does the facility ensure compliance with environmental health and life-safety standards during extreme weather events?
8. What actions, if any, have been taken to address the reported lack of heat at FCI Morgantown?

---

FCI Petersburg (Virginia) — Chronic Lockdowns, Environmental Hazards, and Deteriorating Living Conditions

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple reports from incarcerated individuals, family members, and individuals with direct knowledge of conditions at FCI Petersburg indicating a persistent pattern of chronic lockdowns, unsafe environmental conditions, and institutional dysfunction impacting both incarcerated individuals and staff.

Reports indicate that lockdowns occur frequently and for extended periods, severely restricting movement, access to programming, and basic daily functions. According to reporting, these lockdowns are not isolated responses to specific emergencies but reflect ongoing operational instability.

Additional reporting describes serious infrastructure and environmental health concerns, including water intrusion through walls, visible black mold, and deteriorating living conditions. These conditions are reported to be longstanding rather than temporary and are described as worsening over time.

Food service conditions are also repeatedly raised in reporting. Individuals describe meals that are not fit for human consumption, including spoiled, inadequate, or unsafe food, contributing to health concerns and further degrading living conditions.

Reports further indicate severe morale problems among staff, with multiple accounts stating that staff have openly expressed dissatisfaction with facility leadership and the working environment. Reporting describes a facility climate perceived as hostile and unstable for both incarcerated individuals and correctional officers.

Finally, some reports raise concern regarding security issues and the presence of gang activity within the facility, including allegations that institutional control has been compromised. While these reports are unverified, they contribute to concerns regarding overall safety, leadership effectiveness, and facility oversight.

Taken together, the information suggests systemic failures in facility management, environmental safety, food service, and operational stability at FCI Petersburg.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Chronic and prolonged lockdowns	18 U.S.C. § 4042(a)(2)
Unsafe environmental conditions (water intrusion, mold)	BOP Program Statement 1600.11 (Environmental Health & Safety)
Exposure to black mold and moisture-related hazards	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference
Unsanitary or unsafe food service	BOP Food Service Manual; 28 C.F.R. § 549.70
Deterioration of living conditions	BOP Health & Safety Standards
Institutional instability and security concerns	BOP Security & Management Policies

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “The facility is constantly on lockdown.”
• “Water is seeping through the walls and there’s black mold.”
• “The food is not fit for human consumption.”
• “Staff have said they hate working under the current leadership.”
• “This place is falling apart for everyone inside.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Overuse of lockdowns as a routine operational measure
• Failure to address long-term infrastructure and environmental hazards
• Exposure of incarcerated individuals to mold and unsafe living conditions
• Degraded food quality and sanitation
• Breakdown in staff morale and leadership confidence
• Potential security risks stemming from institutional instability

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FCI Petersburg (MID-ATLANTIC REGION)

1. What circumstances have contributed to the frequency and duration of lockdowns at FCI Petersburg?
2. How does the facility assess whether lockdowns are necessary, and what oversight exists to prevent prolonged or unnecessary restrictions?
3. What steps have been taken to address reports of water intrusion, structural deterioration, and black mold within housing units?
4. How does the facility monitor and remediate environmental health hazards, including moisture and mold?
5. What food safety and quality assurance measures are in place to ensure meals served are safe and suitable for human consumption?
6. What mechanisms exist for staff to report concerns regarding leadership, working conditions, or institutional safety?
7. How does facility leadership address reports of compromised security or gang activity within the institution?
8. What corrective actions, if any, have been initiated to address the cumulative concerns regarding conditions, staffing morale, and operational stability at FCI Petersburg?

---

NORTHEAST REGION

FCI Fort Dix (New Jersey) — Prolonged Hot Water Failure, Retaliation, and Coercive Living Conditions

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple, corroborating reports from incarcerated individuals housed at FCI Fort Dix describing prolonged failure to provide hot water for showers, ongoing exposure to freezing conditions, retaliatory responses to reporting, and coercive living conditions during winter months. These reports span multiple weeks and housing units, indicating a systemic infrastructure and administrative failure rather than an isolated maintenance issue.

According to testimony, incarcerated individuals assigned to Unit 5741 (East Side) and surrounding areas have been without hot water for showering since at least December 15, 2025. As of late January, the condition had persisted for over six weeks, extending through periods of severe winter weather. Individuals report being forced to bathe in freezing water or forgo hygiene altogether due to the cold, resulting in physical discomfort, illness risk, and degradation of basic living standards.

Reports further indicate that individuals who attempted to formally report or “write up” the lack of hot water were met with retaliatory action, including removal from the unit after submitting complaints. Multiple individuals state that officers and unit staff acknowledged the problem but either dismissed it as unresolvable or advised individuals to “stop mentioning it if you know what’s good for you.” This language, if accurate, reflects intimidation and suppression of lawful reporting.

In addition to the hot water failure, reports indicate that incarcerated individuals are being compelled to perform outdoor labor, including snow shoveling, during extreme cold conditions while simultaneously being denied access to hot showers afterward. This combination of forced cold exposure, lack of sanitation, and retaliatory suppression raises serious concerns regarding conditions of confinement, staff conduct, and compliance with basic health and safety obligations.

Taken together, the information reflects a pattern of prolonged infrastructure neglect, normalization of unsafe conditions, and retaliatory discouragement of reporting, resulting in sustained harm to the incarcerated population.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Prolonged denial of hot water for showering during winter months	Eighth Amendment – Conditions of Confinement
Failure to timely remedy known infrastructure failures	BOP Program Statement 4200.04 (Facilities Operations Manual)
Exposure to freezing conditions without adequate mitigation	BOP Program Statement 1600.11 (Environmental Health & Safety)
Retaliation against individuals who report conditions	First Amendment / BOP Retaliation Prohibition
Suppression of complaints through intimidation or threats	28 C.F.R. § 542 (Administrative Remedy Program)
Compelled outdoor labor followed by denial of sanitation	Eighth Amendment – Unnecessary Hardship
Systemic disregard of hygiene and health standards	BOP Program Statement 6031.04 (Patient Care & Hygiene)

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “We haven’t had hot water in our showers in over a month.”
• “There hasn’t been hot water since December 15, 2025.”
• “We’ve been showering with freezing water and the weather outside is no joke.”
• “One guy wrote it up and the unit team got him out of the unit for reporting it.”
• “Officers say they did everything they can, which really means it’s staying broken.”
• “Other officers tell us it’s best to shut up and stop mentioning it if we know what’s good for us.”
• “That’s a threat and retaliation for speaking up.”
• “They force some of us to shovel snow and then we still have to take freezing showers.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Prolonged infrastructure failures allowed to persist for weeks without resolution
• Normalization of freezing water exposure during winter as an acceptable condition
• Retaliatory responses toward individuals who formally report conditions
• Staff acknowledgment of unsafe conditions paired with refusal or inability to act
• Coercive labor expectations combined with denial of basic hygiene
• Breakdown of the Administrative Remedy process through intimidation and suppression
• Increased risk of illness, injury, and long-term health consequences

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FCI Fort Dix (NORTHEAST REGION)

1. When was the hot water failure at Unit 5741 first identified, and what actions were taken at that time to remediate the issue?
2. Why did the lack of hot water persist for over six weeks during winter conditions without interim accommodations or alternative sanitation measures?
3. What maintenance records, work orders, or contractor requests exist documenting attempts to repair the hot water system since December 15, 2025?
4. What guidance were staff given regarding responses to incarcerated individuals reporting the hot water failure?
5. Why were individuals removed from housing units after submitting complaints regarding basic living conditions?
6. What safeguards are in place to prevent retaliation against individuals who report infrastructure or health concerns?
7. How does the facility reconcile compelling outdoor labor in freezing conditions while denying access to hot showers afterward?
8. What corrective actions are being implemented to ensure that future infrastructure failures do not result in prolonged exposure to unsafe conditions?

---

FDC Philadelphia (Pennsylvania) — Food Contamination, Sanitation Failures, and Environmental Health Risks

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple reports from incarcerated individuals, family members, and individuals with direct knowledge of institutional conditions indicating serious food safety violations and sanitation failures at FDC Philadelphia, including within Special Housing Unit (SHU) housing areas.

Reports indicate that prepared food served to incarcerated individuals contained a whole mouse embedded in a chili meal. Following discovery, reporting indicates that food service staff attempted to re-cook and re-serve contaminated food rather than discard it or suspend service pending inspection. This incident reportedly occurred on or around January 23 and impacted individuals housed on the south side of the SHU.

The presence of a rodent in prepared food raises significant concern regarding pest control failures, improper food handling, and lack of health and safety oversight. Reporting further suggests that the response to the incident prioritized continuation of operations rather than protection of health, with no meaningful transparency, notification, or corrective measures communicated to the affected population.

Taken together, these reports suggest a systemic breakdown in food safety protocols and environmental sanitation at FDC Philadelphia, posing ongoing health risks to incarcerated individuals.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Rodent contamination in prepared food	BOP Food Service Manual
Failure to discard contaminated food	BOP Food Safety Standards
Re-cooking and re-serving unsafe meals	28 C.F.R. § 549.70
Inadequate pest control measures	BOP Program Statement 1600.11 (Environmental Health & Safety)
Exposure to unsanitary food conditions	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference
Disproportionate impact on SHU-housed individuals	BOP Restrictive Housing Standards

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “There was a whole mouse in the chili.”
• “They tried to re-cook the food instead of throwing it away.”
• “This happened on the south side of the SHU.”
• “They still served the food after it was found.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Failure to maintain basic food safety and sanitation standards
• Rodent infestation within food preparation or storage areas
• Improper response to food contamination incidents
• Lack of transparency or notification following health hazards
• Elevated health risks for individuals housed in restrictive units
• Institutional minimization of environmental health violations

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FDC Philadelphia (NORTHEAST REGION)

1. What pest control measures are currently in place within food service areas at FDC Philadelphia?
2. What protocols govern response to food contamination, and were they followed in this incident?
3. Why was contaminated food reportedly re-cooked rather than discarded?
4. Were any independent inspections or food safety reviews conducted following this event?
5. What safeguards exist to prevent unsafe food from being served to SHU-housed individuals?
6. How are food service staff trained and supervised regarding contamination response?
7. What corrective actions, if any, were taken after this incident to prevent recurrence?
8. How does the facility document and review food safety violations internally?

---

NORTH CENTRAL REGION

USP Terre Haute (Indiana) — Systemic Medical Mismanagement, Prolonged Restrictive Housing, and Inappropriate Use of Force During Medical Events

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple reports from individuals with direct knowledge of conditions at USP Terre Haute indicating systemic failures in medical management, misuse of restrictive housing for medically vulnerable individuals, and inappropriate custody responses to medical emergencies.

Reporting reflects a recurring pattern in which incarcerated individuals with serious chronic medical conditions, including insulin-dependent diabetes and cardiovascular disease, experience frequent untreated or inadequately treated medical crises. These events reportedly include hypoglycemic episodes and cardiac distress that are not met with timely clinical intervention or escalation.

Information received further indicates that medical emergencies are routinely misclassified as behavioral or compliance issues, resulting in custody responses rather than medical care. Reports describe instances in which individuals experiencing medical crises were restrained and subjected to force instead of receiving appropriate emergency medical evaluation.

Additional reporting raises concern regarding the use of prolonged restrictive housing for individuals with significant medical needs, including extended isolation lasting several months. Incarcerated individuals awaiting medical transfer or specialty care are reportedly held in restrictive conditions without access to consistent treatment, rehabilitative care, or meaningful clinical monitoring.

Reports also indicate breakdowns in continuity of outside medical care, including failure to transport individuals for scheduled surgical procedures after hospital evaluation. Prescribed treatments and medications are reportedly delayed, interrupted, or withheld during these periods, contributing to repeated medical instability.

Collectively, the information reflects a systemic pattern of medical neglect, punitive custody practices, and institutional failure to protect medically vulnerable populations at USP Terre Haute.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Failure to adequately manage chronic and life-threatening medical conditions	BOP Program Statement 6031.04 (Patient Care)
Misclassification of medical emergencies as behavioral incidents	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference
Use of force during medical crises	BOP Program Statement 5566.06 (Use of Force)
Prolonged placement of medically vulnerable individuals in restrictive housing	BOP Restrictive Housing Standards
Failure to ensure continuity of hospital-based or surgical care	28 C.F.R. § 549.70
Interruption or withholding of prescribed medications	BOP Program Statement 6000.05
Inadequate clinical oversight during pending medical transfers	BOP Health Services Administration Policies

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “Medical emergencies are treated like disciplinary problems.”
• “People with serious conditions are kept in isolation instead of being treated.”
• “Outside hospital care doesn’t continue once they’re brought back.”
• “Medical needs are delayed for months while people sit in restrictive housing.”
• “Prescribed care is interrupted without explanation.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Failure to distinguish medical emergencies from disciplinary matters
• Reliance on custody control measures rather than clinical response
• Extended use of restrictive housing for individuals with serious medical needs
• Interruption of prescribed medications and treatment plans
• Breakdown in continuity between outside medical care and facility care
• Inadequate oversight of medical transfer and specialty care processes
• Increased risk of serious injury, permanent harm, or death

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — USP Terre Haute (NORTH CENTRAL REGION)

1. What protocols govern staff response to hypoglycemic events, cardiac distress, or other acute medical emergencies at USP Terre Haute?
2. How does the facility ensure that medical crises are not misclassified as behavioral noncompliance?
3. Under what circumstances may force be used when an individual is experiencing a documented medical emergency?
4. What safeguards exist to prevent prolonged restrictive housing placement of medically vulnerable individuals?
5. How does the facility ensure continuity of care following outside hospital evaluations or surgical scheduling?
6. What oversight mechanisms monitor interruption or withholding of prescribed medications?
7. How are medical transfers evaluated, approved, and tracked to prevent prolonged isolation without treatment?
8. What corrective actions, if any, have been taken to address recurring medical instability among chronically ill individuals at USP Terre Haute?

---

SOUTH CENTRAL REGION

USP Beaumont (Texas) — Systemic Restrictive Housing Conditions, Environmental Hazards, and Failure to Maintain Safe Temperatures

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple reports from individuals with direct knowledge of conditions at USP Beaumont indicating systemic failures within restrictive housing units, including prolonged exposure to extreme cold, inadequate clothing, unsafe environmental conditions, and overuse of suicide-prevention clothing outside appropriate clinical circumstances.

Reporting describes incarcerated individuals recently released from Special Housing Units (SHU) being housed in unheated or inadequately heated cells during periods of cold weather, despite regional temperature drops. Individuals report ice forming on the inside of cell windows, indicating sustained exposure to freezing indoor conditions rather than temporary temperature fluctuations.

Reports further indicate that individuals housed in SHU are routinely issued shorts only, with no access to adequate cold-weather clothing or bedding, despite cold conditions. This practice reportedly occurred during multiple consecutive days of low temperatures.

Additional reporting raises concern regarding environmental health hazards within SHU cells, including standing water, persistent moisture, and widespread cockroach infestations. These conditions are described as ongoing rather than isolated maintenance issues.

Information received also indicates frequent placement of individuals in “paper” suicide-prevention clothing for non-emergency or non-clinical reasons. Reporting suggests this measure is used broadly as a control mechanism rather than as a narrowly tailored response to documented mental health risk, resulting in further deprivation of warmth, dignity, and basic living standards.

Taken together, the information reflects systemic failures in restrictive housing oversight, environmental maintenance, temperature control, and appropriate use of safety protocols, placing incarcerated individuals at risk of harm.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Failure to provide adequate heat in restrictive housing	Eighth Amendment – Conditions of Confinement
Exposure to freezing indoor temperatures	18 U.S.C. § 4042(a)(2)
Inadequate clothing during cold weather	BOP Program Statement 1600.11 (Environmental Health & Safety)
Standing water and pest infestations in cells	BOP Environmental Health Standards
Unsanitary living conditions	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference
Overuse of suicide-prevention “paper” clothing	BOP Psychology Services Manual
Use of restrictive housing practices without appropriate safeguards	BOP Restrictive Housing Policies

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “There was ice on the inside of the window.”
• “They only give shorts, even when it’s cold.”
• “There’s no heat in SHU.”
• “Standing water stays in the cell.”
• “Cockroaches are everywhere.”
• “People are put in paper clothing for everything.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Failure to maintain safe indoor temperatures in restrictive housing
• Inadequate clothing and bedding during cold weather conditions
• Ongoing environmental health hazards, including standing water and pests
• Unsanitary and unsafe SHU living conditions
• Overuse or misuse of suicide-prevention clothing without documented clinical necessity
• Normalization of substandard SHU conditions as routine practice
• Lack of timely maintenance or corrective action despite known hazards

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — USP Beaumont (SOUTH CENTRAL REGION)

1. What temperature standards are required for SHU housing at USP Beaumont, and how is compliance monitored during cold weather?
2. Were heating systems in SHU fully operational during the reported period of freezing conditions?
3. What policies govern the issuance of clothing and bedding for individuals housed in SHU during winter months?
4. How does the facility address reports of standing water, moisture, and pest infestations in restrictive housing cells?
5. Under what circumstances are individuals placed in suicide-prevention “paper” clothing, and what clinical documentation is required?
6. What safeguards exist to prevent non-clinical or punitive use of suicide-prevention measures?
7. How are environmental health hazards in SHU reported, tracked, and remediated?
8. What corrective actions, if any, have been taken to address recurring complaints regarding cold exposure and unsanitary SHU conditions at USP Beaumont?

---

SOUTH CENTRAL REGION

FCI Pollock (Louisiana) — Systemic Temperature Control Failures, Delayed Medical Evaluation, and Administrative Access Barriers

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple reports from incarcerated individuals and individuals with direct knowledge of conditions at FCI Pollock indicating systemic failures related to temperature regulation, medical evaluation delays following injury, inconsistent access to medical records, and administrative barriers to visitation.

Reporting describes prolonged periods without functional heat during winter weather, including following snowfall, resulting in housing units remaining extremely cold for extended periods. Reports further indicate that when heating systems are activated, temperatures fluctuate unpredictably, with some individuals experiencing extreme heat inside cells, to the point of respiratory distress and inability to remain in bed safely.

Information received indicates that temperature regulation is inconsistent and unmanaged, creating alternating exposure to freezing cold and excessive heat rather than maintaining safe and stable indoor conditions.

Additional reporting raises concern regarding delayed medical assessment following traumatic facial injuries, including fractured eye sockets and facial fractures that reportedly have not been fully evaluated or treated by medical providers. Reports indicate that pain management was not initiated until individuals were questioned about whether they had independently received medication, at which point minimal treatment was introduced.

Reports also indicate delays and inconsistencies in providing incarcerated individuals with their medical records, with some individuals being informed that records are “backed up” while others transferred at the same time reportedly received their documentation.

Finally, reporting raises concern regarding administrative barriers to visitation, including instances where visitation approval is reportedly entered into institutional systems but not activated, resulting in continued denial of visits without explanation.

Taken together, the information reflects systemic breakdowns in environmental control, post-injury medical follow-up, medical record access, and administrative processing, rather than isolated incidents or individual errors.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Failure to maintain stable and safe indoor temperatures	Eighth Amendment – Conditions of Confinement
Prolonged lack of heat following winter weather	18 U.S.C. § 4042(a)(2)
Extreme temperature fluctuations causing respiratory distress	BOP Program Statement 1600.11 (Environmental Health & Safety)
Delayed evaluation of facial and orbital fractures	BOP Program Statement 6031.04 (Patient Care)
Inadequate or delayed pain management	28 C.F.R. § 549.70
Delays in providing medical records	BOP Health Information Management Policies
Administrative delays or failures in visitation approval	BOP Visiting Regulations
Lack of continuity between custody, medical, and administrative functions	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “There’s been no heat since the snow and it’s freezing cold.”
• “When the heat comes on, it gets so hot it’s hard to breathe.”
• “People have to stand at the cell door waiting for it to open.”
• “They say nothing can be done about facial fractures.”
• “Medical records are always ‘backed up,’ but others already got theirs.”
• “Visitation shows approved in the system, but it’s still not allowed.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Failure to maintain consistent, safe indoor temperatures
• Extreme temperature swings creating health risks
• Delayed or absent evaluation of traumatic facial injuries
• Minimal pain management introduced only after inquiry
• Inconsistent access to medical records
• Administrative disconnect between approvals and implementation
• Lack of accountability for unresolved visitation delays
• Institutional normalization of unresolved environmental and medical issues

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FCI Pollock (SOUTH CENTRAL REGION)

1. What temperature standards are required for housing units at FCI Pollock, and how are they monitored following winter weather events?
2. Why did housing units reportedly remain without heat following snowfall, and what corrective actions were taken?
3. What safeguards exist to prevent extreme temperature fluctuations that pose respiratory or health risks?
4. What protocols govern medical evaluation and follow-up for individuals with facial fractures or orbital injuries?
5. Why was pain management delayed until individuals were questioned about medication use?
6. What is the standard timeline for providing incarcerated individuals with copies of their medical records, and why are delays occurring?
7. How does the facility ensure that visitation approvals entered into institutional systems are promptly implemented?
8. What internal reviews, if any, have been conducted regarding recurring complaints related to temperature control, medical delays, and administrative access at FCI Pollock?

---

FCI Big Spring (Texas) — Systemic Water Service Failure, Sanitation Breakdown, and Unsafe Living Conditions

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple reports from family members and individuals with direct knowledge of conditions at FCI Big Spring (Low) indicating a systemic failure of basic water and sanitation infrastructure, resulting in unsafe and inhumane living conditions.

Reporting indicates that water service was completely shut off across housing units for an extended period, beginning at least the prior morning and continuing without a communicated restoration timeline. During this outage, incarcerated individuals reportedly received only a single bottle of water per person, with no additional potable water provided for drinking, hygiene, or sanitation needs.

As a result of the water outage, reports indicate that toilets were nonfunctional and could not be flushed, leading to toilets filling with human waste. Individuals reportedly had no access to alternative restroom facilities, showers, or sanitation measures during the outage.

Information received further indicates that staff were unable or unwilling to provide an estimated time for water restoration, leaving incarcerated individuals without clarity, mitigation measures, or interim accommodations. The absence of contingency planning or emergency sanitation response reportedly allowed unsanitary conditions to persist.

Taken together, the information reflects systemic infrastructure failure and inadequate emergency response, resulting in conditions that pose serious health risks and violate basic standards of humane confinement.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Complete loss of water service in housing units	18 U.S.C. § 4042(a)(2)
Inadequate access to potable drinking water	Eighth Amendment – Conditions of Confinement
Toilets rendered unusable due to lack of water	BOP Environmental Health & Sanitation Standards
Accumulation of human waste in living areas	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference
Lack of emergency sanitation measures	BOP Program Statement 1600.11 (Environmental Health & Safety)
Failure to provide hygiene access (showers, handwashing)	28 C.F.R. § 549.70
Absence of clear communication or ETA for restoration	BOP Facilities Operations Policies

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “They have no water at all.”
• “We were given one bottle of water and that was it.”
• “The toilets won’t flush and are full.”
• “There’s nowhere to use the restroom.”
• “No showers, no ETA, nothing.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Complete loss of potable water without emergency mitigation
• Insufficient water distribution during a known outage
• Failure of toilet and sanitation systems
• Accumulation of human waste in housing units
• Elevated risk of illness, infection, and disease transmission
• Lack of contingency planning for infrastructure failures
• Inadequate communication regarding restoration timelines
• Normalization of unsanitary conditions during facility-wide outages

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FCI Big Spring (SOUTH CENTRAL REGION)

1. When was the water outage at FCI Big Spring first identified, and what caused the loss of service?
2. What emergency protocols are required when potable water service is interrupted facility-wide?
3. Why was only one bottle of water provided per individual during an extended outage?
4. What sanitation measures are required when toilets become nonfunctional due to water loss?
5. Were alternative restroom, hygiene, or waste-removal solutions implemented during the outage?
6. What communication protocols exist to inform incarcerated individuals of infrastructure failures and estimated restoration timelines?
7. What health risk assessments were conducted during the period of nonfunctional sanitation systems?
8. What corrective actions have been taken to prevent future water outages from resulting in prolonged unsanitary conditions at FCI Big Spring?

---

FCI Forrest City (Arkansas) — Systemic Infrastructure Failure, Sewage Exposure, Unsafe Food Service, and Prolonged Utility Disruptions

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple, corroborating reports from incarcerated individuals, family members, and individuals with direct knowledge of conditions at FCI Forrest City (Low and Medium) indicating chronic infrastructure failure, repeated sewage and water leaks, prolonged loss of hot water and heat, unsafe food service practices, and routine lockdowns attributed to weather and facility conditions.

Reporting indicates that roof leaks in housing and food service–adjacent areas recur every few months, with water reportedly leaking from upper levels through multiple stories and pooling inside housing pods. Incarcerated individuals have reportedly been required to vacuum standing water themselves, despite uncertainty as to whether the liquid originates from water lines or sewage systems.

Additional reporting describes liquid dripping from ceilings above toilet areas, including liquid believed to be sewage or contaminated water, falling from upper tiers onto individuals while bathrooms are in use. These conditions raise serious concerns regarding sanitation, exposure to biohazards, and environmental health risks.

Reports further indicate prolonged outages of hot water and heat, with multiple housing units reportedly without hot water for weeks at a time during winter conditions. Incarcerated individuals report being forced to take cold showers, endure freezing indoor temperatures, and experience illness as a result. At the same time, reporting indicates that meals are being served cold, with individuals stating they have not received a hot meal in weeks.

Food service conditions are repeatedly raised as a systemic concern. Reporting describes low-quality food, undercooked or improperly prepared meals, unsanitary dishwashing practices due to malfunctioning equipment, and instances of individuals becoming sick after eating facility-provided food. Reports further indicate that dishwashing machines lack functional sanitizing components, preventing proper cleaning of food service items.

Additional reports indicate repeated lockdowns attributed to “weather”, even when conditions do not reasonably justify prolonged restrictions, further limiting access to movement, hygiene, and services.

Taken together, the information reflects persistent infrastructure degradation, sanitation failures, and inadequate corrective response, resulting in unsafe and unhealthy living conditions across multiple units at FCI Forrest City.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Recurrent roof leaks and standing water in housing units	BOP Program Statement 4200.04 (Facilities Operations)
Exposure to sewage or contaminated water dripping into bathrooms	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference
Failure to remediate known plumbing and roof defects	18 U.S.C. § 4042(a)(2)
Prolonged loss of hot water during winter months	BOP Environmental Health & Safety Standards
Inadequate heat in housing units	BOP Program Statement 1600.11 (Environmental Health & Safety)
Unsafe food preparation and service	BOP Food Service Manual
Failure to properly sanitize food service equipment	28 C.F.R. § 549.70
Repeated lockdowns attributed to environmental conditions	BOP Institutional Operations Policies

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “The roof leaks every few months and water pours down through both stories.”
• “There’s standing water in the pod and inmates are vacuuming it all day.”
• “Liquid is dripping from above the toilets while people are using the bathroom.”
• “No hot water for weeks.”
• “They’re serving cold food and haven’t had a hot meal in weeks.”
• “People are getting sick from the food.”
• “The dishwasher doesn’t sanitize the trays.”
• “They keep locking down for ‘weather’ but nothing changes.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Recurrent infrastructure failures without permanent remediation
• Exposure to potentially contaminated water or sewage inside housing units
• Failure to maintain safe plumbing, roofing, and sanitation systems
• Prolonged loss of hot water and heat during winter conditions
• Unsafe food preparation and inadequate sanitation of food service equipment
• Elevated risk of illness, infection, and environmental health harm
• Reliance on incarcerated individuals to manage hazardous conditions
• Routine lockdowns restricting hygiene and services without clear necessity

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FCI Forrest City (SOUTH CENTRAL REGION)

1. How long have roof leaks and plumbing failures been occurring at FCI Forrest City, and what permanent repairs have been implemented?
2. What protocols are followed when water or sewage leaks occur inside housing or bathroom areas?
3. Why were incarcerated individuals tasked with vacuuming standing water rather than trained maintenance staff?
4. What testing, if any, was conducted to determine whether leaked liquid contained sewage or contaminants?
5. What caused the prolonged loss of hot water and heat, and why did these conditions persist for weeks?
6. What measures were implemented to mitigate cold exposure and hygiene limitations during utility outages?
7. How does the facility ensure food is safely prepared, properly cooked, and served at appropriate temperatures?
8. Why were dishwashing machines operating without functional sanitization components?
9. What health monitoring occurred for individuals reporting illness related to food or environmental conditions?
10. What criteria are used to justify lockdowns attributed to weather, and how is oversight applied to prevent unnecessary restrictions?

---

FCI Yazoo City (Mississippi) — Chronic Infrastructure Failure, Water System Collapse, and Environmental Health Risks

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple, corroborating reports from incarcerated individuals, family members, and individuals with direct knowledge of institutional operations indicating chronic and recurring failures of critical infrastructure systems at FCI Yazoo City. These failures include prolonged loss of potable water, nonfunctional sanitation systems, extreme temperature mismanagement, and repeated exposure to sewage or contaminated water conditions.

Reports indicate that incarcerated individuals have experienced multi-day periods without running water, rendering toilets inoperable, preventing showers, and forcing individuals to remain in unsanitary conditions. During these periods, individuals report inadequate access to bottled water and no viable alternatives for hygiene or waste disposal. Reporting further indicates that these outages are not isolated emergencies but part of a longstanding pattern of deferred maintenance and unresolved system failures.

Additional information raises concern regarding temperature control failures, including air conditioning systems operating during winter conditions, lack of functional heat, and auxiliary fans circulating cold air inside housing units while outdoor temperatures are near or below freezing. These conditions reportedly persisted alongside water outages, compounding health and safety risks.

Information provided by individuals with prior work assignments and operational familiarity with facility infrastructure suggests that known defects within water towers, sewer lines, pumps, and related systems have existed for years, with temporary fixes repeatedly implemented in place of permanent repairs. Reports further allege that funding allocated for infrastructure repairs is inconsistently applied, with critical repairs delayed due to budgetary decisions, procurement delays, or mismanagement.

Taken together, the information indicates systemic facilities mismanagement, chronic failure to maintain essential life-safety systems, and an institutional tolerance for unsafe environmental conditions at FCI Yazoo City.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Prolonged loss of potable water and inoperable sanitation systems	18 U.S.C. § 4042(a)(2)
Exposure to sewage or contaminated water conditions	BOP Program Statement 1600.11 (Environmental Health & Safety)
Failure to maintain functional water, sewer, and waste systems	BOP Program Statement 4200.04 (Facilities Operations Manual)
Temperature mismanagement during extreme weather	BOP Environmental Health Standards
Repeated reliance on temporary fixes for known infrastructure failures	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference
Inadequate mitigation measures during infrastructure outages	28 C.F.R. § 549.70
Failure to ensure humane living conditions	Eighth Amendment – Conditions of Confinement

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “We’ve been without water for days — no showers, toilets overflowing.”
• “They shut the water off and told us it wouldn’t be back on until days later.”
• “The heat is off, and cold air is blowing through the units.”
• “This keeps happening. It’s not new.”
• “They say it’s a maintenance issue, but it’s been years.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Recurring loss of potable water and sanitation services
• Exposure to sewage, waste, or contaminated water conditions
• Failure to maintain or permanently repair critical infrastructure systems
• Temperature control failures during extreme weather conditions
• Reliance on temporary or improvised fixes in place of permanent repairs
• Delays attributed to funding, procurement, or administrative decision-making
• Increased risk of illness, infection, and environmental health hazards
• Institutional normalization of unsafe living conditions

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FCI Yazoo City (SOUTH CENTRAL REGION)

1. How many water and sanitation outages has FCI Yazoo City experienced in the past five years, and what were their documented causes?
2. What permanent repairs have been completed on water towers, sewer lines, pumps, and related infrastructure since 2020?
3. What funding allocations were made for infrastructure repairs, and how were those funds expended?
4. What internal inspections or assessments have identified recurring defects in the water and sewer systems?
5. What emergency protocols are in place to ensure sanitation, potable water, and hygiene access during outages?
6. Why were auxiliary cooling systems operating during winter conditions while heat was reportedly unavailable?
7. What oversight mechanisms exist to prevent prolonged reliance on temporary fixes for known infrastructure failures?
8. What corrective actions are currently planned to ensure sustained compliance with environmental health and life-safety standards?

---

FCI Aliceville (Alabama) — Chronic Environmental Health Failures, Infrastructure Neglect, and Administrative Indifference

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple reports from incarcerated individuals and corroborating accounts from loved ones indicating systemic environmental health failures and infrastructure neglect at FCI Aliceville. The conditions described are not isolated incidents but reflect ongoing operational mismanagement that places the incarcerated population at sustained risk.

Reports indicate recurring failures related to temperature control, water access, sanitation, and delayed or absent administrative response when concerns are raised. Despite FCI Aliceville being a relatively newer facility, the conditions described mirror those observed at long-neglected institutions across the Bureau of Prisons, raising serious concerns regarding maintenance practices, oversight mechanisms, and accountability.

The reporting suggests a facility operating reactively rather than preventatively, allowing known deficiencies to persist until conditions escalate to crisis levels rather than being addressed through routine maintenance and oversight.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Repeated exposure to unsanitary and unsafe housing conditions	18 U.S.C. § 4042(a)(2)
Failure to maintain environmental health standards	BOP Program Statement 1600.11 (Environmental Health & Safety)
Inadequate heating and cooling responses during extreme weather	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference
Ongoing infrastructure failures despite repeated complaints	BOP Facilities Operations Manual
Delayed or dismissed administrative response to reported conditions	BOP Standards of Employee Conduct

3. SYSTEMIC PATTERN IDENTIFIED

• Facilities wait for conditions to escalate rather than addressing known deficiencies
• Environmental health complaints are minimized or handled informally
• Temporary or stopgap measures replace permanent corrective action
• Accountability mechanisms fail to trigger timely intervention

4. IMPACT ON INCARCERATED POPULATION

Sustained exposure to these conditions increases risk of:

• Respiratory illness
• Stress-related and exacerbated chronic health conditions
• Sleep disruption and mental health deterioration
• Erosion of trust in institutional grievance and reporting systems

The cumulative impact undermines health outcomes and rehabilitative goals, contradicting the Bureau of Prisons’ duty to provide safe and humane confinement.

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FCI Aliceville (SOUTH CENTRAL REGION)

1. What preventive maintenance protocols are currently in place at FCI Aliceville, and how frequently are they audited?
2. How many environmental or infrastructure complaints have been logged in the past 12 months, and what corrective actions were taken?
3. What timelines govern responses to heating, cooling, and sanitation failures once reported?
4. How is compliance with environmental health standards independently verified at this facility?
5. What mechanisms ensure unresolved complaints are escalated beyond local administration?

---

WESTERN REGION

FCI Terminal Island (California) — Medical Device Interference and Unsafe Denial of Prescribed CPAP Water

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received reports indicating that FCI Terminal Island is refusing to provide required water for CPAP machines, effectively interfering with prescribed medical treatment for incarcerated individuals diagnosed with sleep apnea.

According to reporting, individuals who rely on CPAP devices are being told that water will not be provided and that access will not resume until housing or unit movement occurs. This denial persists despite established medical requirements that CPAP machines must use distilled or sterilized water and cannot safely operate using untreated sink water due to contamination and infection risks.

The refusal to provide appropriate water renders prescribed CPAP devices unsafe or unusable, placing affected individuals at risk of oxygen deprivation, cardiovascular strain, stroke risk, and severe sleep disruption.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Refusal to provide distilled or sterilized water for CPAP use	18 U.S.C. § 4042(a)(2)
Interference with prescribed medical devices	28 C.F.R. § 549.10
Rendering CPAP machines unsafe or unusable	BOP Program Statement 6031.04 (Patient Care)
Conditioning medical care on housing movement	Eighth Amendment – Deliberate Indifference
Non-medical staff interference with treatment access	BOP Standards of Employee Conduct

3. MEDICAL CONTEXT

• Distilled or sterilized water only
• No use of sink or untreated water due to bacterial, mold, and mineral exposure
• Continuous nightly use to prevent hypoxia, cardiac strain, and sleep disruption

Denying proper CPAP water is functionally equivalent to withholding the medical device itself and creates foreseeable, preventable harm.

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERN

• Medical needs subordinated to housing logistics
• Treatment access used as leverage for movement or compliance
• Responsibility shifted between departments to avoid accountability

5. IMPACT ON INCARCERATED POPULATION

• Oxygen deprivation during sleep
• Cardiovascular events
• Severe fatigue, cognitive impairment, and mental health decline
• Increased likelihood of medical emergencies requiring outside intervention

6. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FCI Terminal Island (WESTERN REGION)

1. Who authorized the suspension of CPAP water access at FCI Terminal Island?
2. What medically approved water source, if any, has been provided in place of distilled water?
3. How many individuals at this facility are currently prescribed CPAP devices?
4. Why is access to prescribed medical supplies being conditioned on housing movement?
5. What safeguards exist to prevent non-medical staff from interfering with prescribed treatment?

---

FCI Sheridan (Oregon) — Systemic Medical Neglect, Staffing Collapse, and Excessive Lockdowns

1. SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Loved Ones Coalition has received multiple reports from incarcerated individuals, family members, and individuals with direct knowledge of institutional operations indicating systemic medical neglect, severe staffing shortages, prolonged leadership instability, and excessive use of lockdowns at FCI Sheridan.

Reports indicate an active and worsening scabies outbreak within the facility that is not being adequately mitigated by medical staff. According to reporting, incarcerated individuals experiencing symptoms are not receiving timely treatment, appropriate isolation, or preventative measures to stop further spread. Individuals report that physicians and medical staff are allegedly failing to provide meaningful intervention or support, allowing a communicable condition to persist across housing units.

Additional reporting identifies a longstanding leadership vacuum, with the facility reportedly operating without a permanent Warden for approximately three years. Interim or acting wardens have reportedly cycled through the institution for short periods, resulting in inconsistent policy enforcement, lack of accountability, and operational instability. At the time of reporting, FCI Sheridan is also reportedly operating with only one Assistant Warden, further limiting administrative oversight.

Severe mental health and treatment staffing shortages are also reported. Information indicates the psychology department is missing critical roles, including a Drug and Alcohol Coordinator, a Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) Coordinator, multiple staff psychologists, and several drug treatment specialists. These vacancies reportedly limit access to substance use treatment, mental health care, and rehabilitative programming.

Reports further indicate excessive and prolonged lockdowns, which significantly restrict movement, access to programming, recreation, medical services, and treatment. These lockdowns are described as routine and operational rather than tied to isolated emergencies, compounding the impact of staffing shortages and medical neglect.

Taken together, the information reflects a facility experiencing systemic operational breakdown, characterized by leadership instability, untreated communicable disease, insufficient medical and psychological staffing, and overreliance on lockdowns as a management tool, placing the incarcerated population at sustained risk.

2. KEY ALLEGATION & VIOLATION TABLE

Allegation	Policy / Statute Implicated
Failure to adequately treat and contain a scabies outbreak	BOP Program Statement 6031.04 (Patient Care)
Medical staff inaction regarding communicable disease	28 C.F.R. § 549.70
Chronic leadership vacancy (no permanent Warden)	18 U.S.C. § 4042(a)(2)
Severe mental health and substance treatment staffing shortages	BOP Psychology Services Manual
Denial or limitation of treatment due to lack of coordinators	BOP Drug Abuse Programs Policy
Excessive and prolonged lockdowns	Eighth Amendment – Conditions of Confinement
Restricted access to medical and mental health services during lockdowns	Deliberate Indifference Standard
Institutional instability and lack of oversight	BOP Management & Operational Standards

3. DIRECT TESTIMONY / DIRECT QUOTES

• “FCI Sheridan has a bad case of scabies and the physicians aren’t doing anything to help or stop it.”
• “People aren’t getting treatment or support for it at all.”
• “We’ve been without a permanent warden for years.”
• “The psychology department is missing key staff and programs don’t run.”
• “Lockdowns are constant and stop everything.”

(Sources withheld to prevent retaliation.)

4. SYSTEMIC CONCERNS

• Failure to address and contain a communicable disease outbreak
• Inadequate medical response to infectious conditions
• Long-term absence of permanent facility leadership
• Severe shortages in psychology, substance use, and treatment staff
• Limited or denied access to mental health and rehabilitative programming
• Excessive reliance on lockdowns as a default management tool
• Compounded harm caused by simultaneous medical neglect and lockdown conditions
• Lack of consistent oversight, accountability, and corrective action

5. OVERSIGHT QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION — FCI Sheridan (WESTERN REGION)

1. What protocols are currently in place at FCI Sheridan for identifying, treating, and containing communicable diseases such as scabies?
2. How many individuals have reported symptoms related to the current scabies outbreak, and what treatment has been provided?
3. Why has FCI Sheridan operated without a permanent Warden for approximately three years, and what impact assessments have been conducted regarding leadership instability?
4. What positions within the psychology and drug treatment departments are currently vacant, and how long have those vacancies persisted?
5. How does the facility ensure access to mental health care, substance use treatment, and MAT services despite staffing shortages?
6. What criteria are used to initiate and extend lockdowns at FCI Sheridan, and how frequently are lockdowns reviewed for necessity?
7. How are medical and mental health services maintained during prolonged lockdowns to prevent care interruption?
8. What corrective actions, if any, are being implemented to address the combined impacts of leadership gaps, staffing shortages, untreated medical conditions, and excessive lockdowns at FCI Sheridan?

---

CONCLUSION

The conditions documented in this report reflect a clear and recurring pattern across multiple Bureau of Prisons facilities and regions. While the specific failures vary by location, the underlying issues are consistent: breakdowns in basic infrastructure, delayed or denied medical care, misuse of restrictive housing, staffing shortages, leadership instability, and administrative processes that fail to resolve known risks in a timely manner.

These are not isolated events. They are predictable outcomes of systems that allow life-safety failures, medical neglect, and environmental hazards to persist without effective intervention or accountability. In many instances, the same categories of failures appear repeatedly across facilities, suggesting structural weaknesses rather than localized operational lapses.

Loved Ones Coalition submits this report to emphasize that early oversight and corrective action are both possible and necessary. Many of the conditions described were reported repeatedly before escalating into crisis-level harm. Addressing these issues proactively protects incarcerated individuals, reduces operational strain on staff, limits liability exposure, and prevents avoidable medical emergencies, litigation, and loss of life.

This report is intended to support transparency, accountability, and constructive engagement. Each facility section includes targeted oversight questions designed to clarify current practices, identify breakdowns, and create pathways for remediation. Loved Ones Coalition stands ready to engage with oversight bodies, facility leadership, and relevant agencies to support corrective action while safeguarding reporting sources from retaliation.

Absent meaningful accountability and sustained corrective action, these patterns will continue to repeat. With appropriate oversight, coordination, and intervention, they do not have to.