THE NEED FOR A PROPER DEFINITION AND LIMITATION OF THE ROLE OF THE FEDERAL COURT IN CONDITIONS-OF-CONFINEMENT CASES IS CITED, AND IT IS NOTED THAT MANY MERITORIOUS GRIEVANCES POSSIBLY REMEDIABLE UNDER STATE LAW DO NOT CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. GREATER INVOLVEMENT OF STATE COURTS IN CONDITIONS-OFCONFINEMENT CASES IS RECOMMENDED, AND IT IS POINTED OUT THAT MERITORIOUS COMPLAINTS SHOULD RECEIVE JUDICIAL ATTENTION EVEN THOUGH THE COMPLAINT MAY NOT INVOLVE A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. INCREASED USE OF MAGISTRATES AND STAFF LAW CLERKS IS RECOMMENDED AS A MEANS OF MORE EFFECTIVELY HANDLING CONDITIONS-OFCONFINEMENT CASES BROUGHT IN FEDERAL COURT. PROCEDURAL STANDARDS ARE PROPOSED FOR THE MORE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT HANDLING OF CASES TO ENSURE THAT MERITORIOUS COMPLAINTS ARE IDENTIFIED AND OTHERS DISMISSED. THE FOLLOWING MATTERS ARE TREATED IN THE PROCEDURAL STANDARDS: THE USE OF COMPLAINT FORMS; CENTRALIZATION IN DISTRICT COURTS; DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT; PROCEDURE TO PREVENT EX PARTE COMMUNICATION BY PRO SE PLAINTIFF; PROVISION FOR COUNSEL; MOTIONS; DISMISSAL FOR PLAINTIFF'S FAILURE TO PROSECUTE; PROCEDURES FOLLOWING THE FILING OF AN ANSWER BY THE DEFENDANT; SPECIAL REPORT FROM THE DEFENDANT; PRETRIAL CONFERENCE; AND EVIDENTIARY HEARINGS. RECOMMENDED COMPLAINT FORMS ARE INCLUDED. (RCB)