The literature suggests that although inter-State negotiation is essential and the reality of politics provides an unavoidable overlay, regionalization of prisons among two or more States is fiscally and administratively feasible. Two major legal issues impinge on the feasibility of inter-State prison regionalization. The first concerns authority to enter into arrangements for establishing regional prisons. No law prevents the Federal Government or States from establishing such prisons, although there may be political barriers to the consummation of a compact between States. The second area involves substantive and procedural issues surrounding the involuntary inter-State transfer of prisoners. These issues are not insurmountable; procedural issues would be involved only if State law itself creates rights from which a constitutionally cognizable liberty or interest originates. The mail survey of attorneys general, corrections directors, and consultants soliciting opinions relevant to the feasibility of the four models highlighted the importance of financial feasibility to the overall feasibility of the models, and indicated that special purpose, multi-State regional prisons were perceived as more attractive than multipurpose facilities. On the basis of these analyses, there seem to be no insurmountable barriers to the establishment of regional prisons. An analysis of the separate authority, contract operation, Federal Government operation, and private sector models of regional prisons in terms of startup time, initial capital outlay, legal problems, and liability to States indicates that multi-State federally operated and privately operated special purpose regional prison models would be most feasible. Further evaluation of the actual operation of these two models is recommended. Notes, tables, graphs, and 22 references are provided.