JUDICIAL EMPHASIS ON THE ISSUE OF PRISONERS' RIGHTS SUGGESTS THAT CORRECTIONAL OFFICIALS WOULD BE WELL ADVISED TO DEVELOP, IN ADVANCE OF COURT INTERVENTION, PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES WHICH COMPLEMENT THE PROGRAM'S CUSTODIAL AND TREATMENT OBJECTIVES WHILE ALSO PROVIDING CONSTITUTIONALLY ACCEPTABLE DUE PROCESS SAFEGUARDS. COMMUNITY PREPAROLE PROGRAMS ARE AN EXAMPLE OF INNOVATIONS WHICH HAVE NOT YET BEEN SUBJECT TO RIGOROUS EXTERNAL REVIEW. THE LEGAL AND SOCIAL STATUS OF OFFENDERS IN PREPAROLE PROGRAMS IS UNIQUE, AND DUE PROCESS GUIDELINES ESTABLISHED FOR TRADITIONAL PROBATION AND PAROLE PROCESSING DO NOT PROVIDE COMPLETELY ANALOGOUS STANDARDS FOR THE PREPAROLEE WHOSE COMMUNITY STATUS IS REVOKED AS A DISCIPLINARY MEASURE. THE CSC PROGRAMS IN PENNSYLVANIA ARE PART OF A CORRECTIONAL PLAN FOR SYSTEMATIC REDUCTION OF CUSTODY AND COMMUNITY REINTEGRATION, WHICH PROVIDE SOME EXAMPLES OF THE DUE PROCESS PROBLEMS INVOLVED. AN INMATE IS ELIGIBLE FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE PROGRAM AFTER COMPLETION OF ONE-HALF OF HIS MINIMUM SENTENCE. CSC RESIDENTS ARE USUALLY REQUIRED TO SPEND FIVE NIGHTS A WEEK IN THE FACILITY WHILE PARTICIPATING IN WORK OR EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES DURING THE DAY; ON WEEKENDS THE RESIDENT IS USUALLY ALLOWED A FURLOUGH. MINOR VIOLATIONS OF CSC RULES AND REGULATIONS MAY RESULT IN CANCELLATION OF FURLOUGH PRIVILEGES OR LOWERING OF THE CURFEW. MAJOR VIOLATIONS OR REPEATED MINOR INFRACTIONS MAY RESULT IN REVOCATION OF PREPAROLE STATUS AND TRANSFER BACK TO THE INSTITUTION. ALTHOUGH THE BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS HAS ISSUED DIRECTIVES CONCERNING DISCIPLINARY ACTION HEARINGS, THE LANGUAGE OF THE DIRECTIVES IS INAPPROPRIATE AND AMBIGUOUS BOTH IN DESCRIBING WHAT CONSTITUTES APPROPRIATE RESIDENT BEHAVIORS AND IN DELINEATING HEARING PROCEDURES. MOREOVER, THESE DIRECTIVES DO NOT SPECIFICALLY REFER TO CSC'S AND SET STANDARDS OF MISCONDUCT WHICH APPLY TO CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS BUT WHICH DO NOT APPLY TO THE GREATER LIBERTIES PERMITTED IN THE CENTERS. A LACK OF SECURE DETENTION FACILITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STAFFING PATTERNS FURTHER INVALIDATES THE USE OF THESE GUIDELINES, AND EACH CSC HAS DEVELOPED ITS OWN MANNER FOR DEALING WITH DISCIPLINARY PROBLEMS. FINALLY, THERE IS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER SAFEGUARDS IN THE DIRECTIVES ARE ADEQUATE FOR THE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT LOSS OF LIBERTIES A CSC RESIDENT INCURS BY REVOCATION. PREVIOUS JUDICIAL DECISIONS PERTAINING TO PRISONERS' RIGHTS ARE REVIEWED, AND IT IS URGED THAT INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS SUCH AS THE CSC'S DEVELOP CLEAR AND CONSISTENT PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS IN KEEPING WITH THE INTENT AND MEANING OF THOSE ESTABLISHED BY JUDICIAL REVIEW. (JAP)