Restrictive Housing.
The Washington State Department of Corrections (DOC) has an internal policy governing restrictive housing.? Restrictive housing is housing for incarcerated persons whose continued presence in the general population would pose a serious threat to employees, themselves, other persons, or to the security of a correctional facility.? Restrictive housing includes administrative?segregation, prehearing confinement, disciplinary segregation, maximum custody, and close observation.
The DOC has a separate policy governing administrative?segregation.
?
Administrative Segregation.
Under the DOC's policy, the purpose of administrative segregation is to temporarily remove an incarcerated person from the general population until a timely and informed decision can be made about appropriate housing based on behavior.? The DOC policy provides that a person may be assigned to administrative segregation when the person:
?
The DOC Superintendent or designee must approve placement on administrative segregation within two business days.? An initial informal review of the placement is held within two business days of the initial placement.? There is an intermediate review 14 days after the initial review.? A final review is completed within 30 days of the initial placement.? If the person is on administrative segregation status for more than 30 days, one of the following actions occurs:
?
Total Confinement.
Total confinement is confinement inside the physical boundaries of a facility or institution operated or utilized under contract by the state or any other unit of government for 24 hours a day.? The DOC's written rules of conduct for incarcerated persons specifies prohibited acts and penalties that will be imposed for various degrees of violation.? Sanctions include loss of privileges, loss of good conduct time credits, and loss of earned time credits.? Per the DOC Statewide Orientation Handbook, the standard of proof for a disciplinary hearing of an alleged violation in total confinement is some evidence.
?
Partial Confinement.
For certain persons, a term of total confinement may be converted to partial confinement.? Partial confinement is confinement up to one year in a facility operated or contracted by the state or?other unit of government, or in an approved residence, for a substantial portion of each day with?the balance of the day spent in the community.? Partial confinement may include work release, home detention, work crew, or electronic monitoring.
?
During the period of partial confinement, a person may be required to comply with crime-related prohibitions and affirmative conditions imposed by the court or the DOC.? If the rules of the partial confinement program are violated, the person may be required to serve the remainder of the term in total confinement.? Under DOC rule, the standard for a disciplinary hearing for an alleged violation in partial confinement is preponderance of the evidence.
Administrative Segregation.
Administrative segregation is defined as the temporary removal from the general population of an incarcerated person who is deemed to present a threat to the safety and security of staff, the incarcerated population, or the community, until a timely and informed decision can be made about appropriate housing based on the incarcerated person's circumstance.
?
Circumstances or actions that may warrant administrative segregation for disciplinary reasons include:
?
Medical necessity may justify placing a person temporarily in close observation areas or infirmaries under medical supervision, but does not justify administrative segregation.
?
The DOC will evaluate its practices for administrative segregation with a goal to reduce such placements to 15 days or less.? If a person's administrative segregation placement is extended past 30 days, the DOC will update the person on their status and the reasons for the extended placement.? Extensions beyond 45 days require authorization by the DOC Secretary or designee and a written explanation.?
?
The DOC must notify the Office of the Corrections Ombuds (OCO) any time a person has remained on administrative segregation for more than 45 consecutive days.? An incarcerated person may not lose housing, education, work assignments, or other programming assignments solely due to placement on administrative segregation, unless there are documented institutional or programmatic needs that require such removal or change.
?
The DOC must post on its website by January 31, 2026, and annually thereafter, a report on its use of administrative segregation.? The report must include, for the prior year:
?
Disciplinary Hearings.
In a disciplinary hearing of an alleged rule violation by an incarcerated person, the standard of proof is preponderance of the evidence.? The hearing officer must articulate what evidence supports the officer's finding, and record a summary of the facts and evidence supporting the hearing decision.
The substitute bill:
?
There is also a new provision requiring the DOC to post on its website by January 31, 2026, and annually thereafter, a report on its use of administrative segregation.? The report must include, for the prior year:
(In support) This bill is trying to reduce the number of individuals that are placed in administrative segregation status. ?The DOC should use preponderance of the evidence as the standard for evaluating an alleged violation before sending a person into this type of placement, which is a significant enforcement of possible infraction.? Prolonged isolation has profound impacts on individuals.? Administrative segregation and similar placements can lead to a loss of housing and other privileges, and have detrimental lasting mental health effects for the individual. ?Incarcerated individuals in administrative segregation face constant artificial light, no access to natural light, and 22 hours of solitary confinement per day, all within a small cell. ?Social isolation shortens lifespans.? Research shows that great harm is caused by solitary confinement; it does not reduce prison violence.? This type of isolated confinement reduces people's capacity to settle disputes peacefully.?
?
Right now, there is virtually no accountability in the DOC disciplinary process for incarcerated individuals.? The DOC correctional officers put people in administrative segregation based on hearsay and without actual evidence.? A person can be infracted for more than 100 violations in prison and can be sanctioned based on the DOC standard of some evidence.? This bill would change the evidentiary standard to preponderance of the evidence for disciplinary hearings.? Twenty other states use this standard in the correctional facility disciplinary process.? The DOC already uses preponderance of the evidence in Prison Rape Elimination Act hearings.
?
(Opposed) None.
?
(Other) Administrative segregation is not a disciplinary hearing.? It is a temporary restricted housing assignment, and it is used in an investigatory process when the DOC is reviewing safety concerns.? This process runs concurrently with disciplinary review in many cases.? The DOC wants to move toward the direction of using preponderance of the evidence as the standard for these matters, but does not fully understand the impact of making that change yet.? The bill reduces the circumstances when administrative segregation can be applied.? The DOC would like to maintain the existing timelines of administrative segregation.? Language should be added to the bill that permits the DOC to separate persons who are threatened, or those who threaten others, to keep the facility safe.? The DOC wants to adopt preponderance of the evidence as the standard in its internal policy, but would prefer that this standard is not put into statute.? When people commit crimes, there are consequences, both outside and inside of prison.? The timelines established in the bill for administrative segregation placements and review are too short.? There is a shortage of staffing and skilled staffing in correctional facilities.? There is a shortage of investigators.? Reporting to the OCO does not satisfy the needs of the public.? Violence has increased in prisons, and the DOC employees are feeling the impact.
(In support) Representative Strom Peterson, prime sponsor; Micaela Romero; Rachael Seevers, Disability Rights Washington; Derek Collier; Terry Kupers; Marriam Oliver, Solitary of Survivors Coalition; Samuel Merrill, Quaker Voice on WA Public Policy; and Cindy Elsberry, Washington Defender Association.