Medium Security Prisons | Medium-Security Federal Prisons

By Elizabeth Franklin-Best, Esq., and Christopher Zoukis, JD, MBA

A medium-security federal prison is a Federal Correctional Institution (FCI) that houses men whose Bureau of Prisons security point score falls between 16 and 23, plus men scored lower who carry a Public Safety Factor that pushes them up. Those two numbers — 16 and 23 — are the whole definition, and they come from a single table in Program Statement 5100.08, Inmate Security Designation and Custody Classification, at p. 14.

The Bureau’s public facility roster carries 43 medium-security institutions. There are no medium-security prisons for women: the Bureau classifies female institutions as Minimum, Low, High and Administrative only, a fact stated in a footnote at PS 5100.08 at p. 15.

Staff score the caseOn the Inmate Load and Security Designation Form, BP‑337.

SENTRY totals the pointsSeverity of offense, criminal history, detainers, escapes, violence, age, education, drug use.

A Public Safety Factor is appliedIf one fits, it sets a floor and the point total no longer controls.

A Management Variable may shift itStaff judgment can move the placement one level up or down.

DSCC designates the institutionThe Designation and Sentence Computation Center in Grand Prairie, Texas, makes the call.

The score is the starting point, not the answer. Most people are surprised by step three: a Public Safety Factor keeps someone out of a lower‑security institution no matter how few points they scored, and no more than three may be applied at once. Steps three and four are also where a lawyer’s work actually lands — the point total is arithmetic, but the PSF and the Management Variable turn on judgment and on the record the Bureau is given.

Source: BOP Program Statement 5100.08, Inmate Security Designation and Custody Classification (Change Notice CN‑3, May 6, 2026), chs. 1, 2 and 5. Verified against the program statement text; confirm current policy before relying on it in a specific case.

Medium security at a glance

Facility type	Federal Correctional Institution (FCI); a few are units inside a Federal Correctional Complex
Male security point range	16–23 points (PS 5100.08 at p. 14)
Female equivalent	None. Female institutions are Minimum, Low, High, Administrative (PS 5100.08 at p. 15)
Custody levels housed	OUT and IN — not COMMUNITY, not MAXIMUM (PS 5100.08 at p. 14)
Institutions on BOP’s roster	43
Combined published population	54,508 (BOP facility records; complex figures include the adjacent camp)
Share of the rostered federal population	roughly 40 percent — the largest single security level
Governing policy	PS 5100.08, CN-3 dated 6 May 2026
Governing regulation	28 C.F.R. pt. 524
Governing statute	18 U.S.C. § 3621(b)
Who decides	The Designation and Sentence Computation Center (DSCC), Grand Prairie, Texas

Facility counts and populations read from the Bureau’s own facility records, retrieved 11 June 2026 and reconciled against BOP’s live roster 5 September 2026. Populations change weekly; the classification rules do not.

A Program Statement is the Bureau’s internal instruction to its own staff. It is agency policy, not law. The regulation at 28 C.F.R. pt. 524 and the statute at 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b) are what bind the Bureau; PS 5100.08 is how the Bureau tells its staff to apply them. That distinction matters when you challenge a designation, and we come back to it below.

How the Bureau arrives at 16–23 points

Nobody at the Bureau decides that a person “seems like a medium.” A designator at the DSCC opens the Judgment, the Statement of Reasons and the Presentence Report, enters ten items on the Inmate Load and Security Designation Form (BP-337), and the Bureau’s computer system adds them up. The sum is the Security Point Total — the sum of items 5 through 14 (PS 5100.08 at p. 46).

Here is the scoring, verbatim from the form instructions in Chapter 4:

Item	Points	Source
Voluntary Surrender	−3 if the Judgment allowed post-sentencing self-surrender and the person was not escorted by law enforcement; 0 if not. Same-day surrender to the Marshals does not count.	PS 5100.08 at p. 38
Severity of Current Offense	0 Lowest · 1 Low Moderate · 3 Moderate · 5 High · 7 Greatest — scored on the most severe documented behavior, not the conviction offense	PS 5100.08 at p. 40
Criminal History Score	0 (0–1 criminal history points) · 2 (2–3) · 4 (4–6) · 6 (7–9) · 8 (10–12) · 10 (13+)	PS 5100.08 at p. 41
History of Violence	Minor: 0 none / 1 (>15 yrs) / 1 (10–15) / 3 (5–10) / 5 (<5 yrs). Serious: 0 / 2 / 4 / 6 / 7	PS 5100.08 at p. 42
History of Escape or Attempts	Minor: 0 / 1 / 1 / 2 / 3. Serious: 0 / 3 at every interval — and a serious escape also triggers a Public Safety Factor	PS 5100.08 at p. 43
Type of Detainer	0 None · 1 Lowest/Low Moderate · 3 Moderate · 5 High · 7 Greatest	PS 5100.08 at p. 44
Age	0 (55 and over) · 2 (36–54) · 4 (25–35) · 8 (24 or less)	PS 5100.08 at p. 45
Education Level	0 verified high-school diploma or GED · 1 enrolled and progressing in GED · 2 no diploma/GED and not enrolled	PS 5100.08 at p. 45
Drug/Alcohol Abuse	0 never or more than 5 years ago · 1 within 5 years	PS 5100.08 at p. 46

Work the arithmetic and the shape of medium security becomes obvious. A 30-year-old (4 points) with no diploma who is not in a GED class (2), a documented drug problem within five years (1), a Moderate-severity offense (3), a criminal history score of 6 (6), and a fight with a guilty finding three years ago (5) scores 21 points — squarely medium. Take away the fight and add a GED and he is at 14 — low security. Add a self-surrender that the court allowed and the −3 puts him at 11 — a federal prison camp.

Two of those items are the ones people can actually move. Enrolling in and progressing through a GED program takes the education item from 2 to 1 and, on completion, to 0. And age is scored automatically from date of birth — the Bureau’s system enters it without staff input — which is why long sentences drift downward in security as the person crosses 36 and then 55.

Applied Insight — Christopher Zoukis, JD, MBA, Managing Director: The single most common scoring error we see is Severity of Current Offense. The instruction is to score “the most severe documented instant offense behavior regardless of the conviction offense,” and staff are told to read the Statement of Reasons — the Bureau’s own worked example shows a Moderate score dropping to Low Moderate because the sentencing judge found a smaller drug quantity than the Presentence Report alleged. If the judge made a finding that narrows the conduct, that finding belongs in front of the designator, and it is worth checking whether it ever got there.

What overrides the points: Public Safety Factors

A point score is not the last word. A Public Safety Factor (PSF) is “relevant factual information regarding the inmate’s current offense, sentence, criminal history or institutional behavior that requires additional security measures,” and a PSF sets a floor the score cannot go below. A maximum of three may be applied at once (PS 5100.08 at p. 56), and where more than three apply, staff use the three producing the greatest security.

Two PSFs put men into medium security who would otherwise score lower, and this is where the live numbers most people half-remember come from. Under the Sentence Length factor:

• more than 10 years remaining to serve → at least Low security;
• more than 20 years remaining to serve → at least Medium security;
• more than 30 years remaining to serve, including non-parolable life sentences → High security.

That is PS 5100.08 at p. 58, verbatim, and each of those floors can be waived. The Serious Escape factor does the same thing: a man who escaped from a secure facility, or from an open facility with a threat of violence, “will be housed in at least a Medium security level institution, unless the PSF has been waived” — PS 5100.08 at p. 59.

The Bureau publishes the whole grid. This is Table 5-2 for men, reproduced from PS 5100.08 at p. 61:

Security point total	Public Safety Factor	Resulting security level
0–11	None	Minimum
0–11	Deportable Alien / Juvenile Violence / Greatest Severity Offense / Sex Offender / Serious Telephone Abuse / Threat to Government Officials	Low
0–11	Sentence Length — more than 10 years remaining	Low
0–11	Sentence Length — more than 20 years remaining	Medium
0–11	Sentence Length — more than 30 years remaining (incl. non-parolable life and death-penalty cases)	High
0–11	Serious Escape	Medium
0–11	Disruptive Group	High
0–11	Prison Disturbance	High
12–15	None	Low
12–15	Serious Escape	Medium
12–15	Sentence Length — more than 20 years remaining	Medium
12–15	Sentence Length — more than 30 years remaining	High
12–15	Disruptive Group	High
12–15	Prison Disturbance	High
16–23	None	Medium
16–23	Disruptive Group	High
16–23	Prison Disturbance	High
16–23	Sentence Length — more than 30 years remaining	High
24+	(any)	High

Read that table and the answer to “do murderers go to medium-security prisons?” falls out. Nothing in the grid mentions a conviction offense by name. A homicide conviction scores 7 points as Greatest Severity — but 7 points is not 24 points, and a Greatest Severity PSF only sets a Low floor for men. Someone convicted of a killing who has little criminal history, no institutional violence, is past 55, has a diploma, and has served far enough into the sentence that fewer than 20 years remain can and does end up at a medium. Meanwhile a man with a modest fraud conviction, a long criminal history, a recent assault finding and 25 years still to serve can score higher than he does. The federal system classifies conduct, history and time remaining — not the label on the indictment.

Management Variables: the discretionary override in both directions

When a designator believes the score does not tell the truth, PS 5100.08 gives them a Management Variable (MGTV) — a documented reason to place someone at a level inconsistent with the score. Two of them move the security level:

• Greater Security (code V) — applied when the person is a greater risk than the score shows (pending charges, a detainer, escape risk). It requires the DSCC Administrator to assign a Management Security Level at least one level above the scored level, and it carries an expiration of up to 24 months.
• Lesser Security (code W) — applied when the person is a lesser risk than the score shows (a detainer removed, positive adjustment; the Bureau’s stated example is a case “where age is largely the contributing factor”). It sets a Management Security Level at least one level below the scored level, and has no expiration.

Both are at PS 5100.08 at pp. 53–55, with the full expiration table at p. 55. The practical point for a family: a person can be scored medium and housed low, or scored low and housed medium, and the reason will be a two-letter code on the classification paperwork. Ask the unit team which Management Variable is on the file and when it expires. If the answer is “Greater Security,” there is a clock running.

What life is actually like in a medium-security FCI

Medium security is where most of the federal system lives, and its texture is set less by the fence than by two things: cell housing and controlled movement.

Custody level is the operational fact. A medium-security institution is authorized to hold people at OUT and IN custody only. An IN-custody person “is assigned to regular quarters and is eligible for all regular work assignments and activities under a normal level of supervision” but is not eligible for work details or programs outside the institution’s secure perimeter — PS 5100.08 at p. 17. An OUT-custody person “may be assigned to less secure housing and may be eligible for work details outside the institution’s secure perimeter with a minimum of two-hour intermittent staff supervision” — PS 5100.08 at p. 21. That single distinction governs which jobs exist for you, whether you can be on an outside detail, and how much of the day is spent behind a locked door.

What a medium does not hold is equally definitional. It cannot house COMMUNITY custody — the level that permits placement outside the perimeter and community-based activity — and it cannot house MAXIMUM custody, reserved for people “identified as assaultive, predacious, riotous, serious escape risks, or seriously disruptive” (PS 5100.08 at p. 19). A custody change in either direction therefore forces a transfer out. We describe how that works below.

Beyond custody, the honest answer is it varies by institution, and the thing that governs the variation is the institution supplement — the local written policy each warden issues under the national Program Statement. Recreation hours, commissary days, phone schedules, visiting days, property limits and movement times are set locally. Two mediums 200 miles apart can run very differently. Our pages on recreation, visiting, telephone use, commissary and housing explain the national floor; the institution supplement, which the law library keeps, is what applies on the compound.

Programs are national, though, and they run at mediums like anywhere else. The Residential Drug Abuse Program operates at medium-security institutions. So do education and vocational programs and UNICOR industries. And the classification clock never stops: 28 C.F.R. § 524.11 requires initial classification within 28 calendar days of arrival and a program review at least every 180 days, tightening to every 90 days once the person is within twelve months of the projected release date, with 48 hours’ notice before each appearance.

Inmate culture and safety concerns

Medium security concentrates two things at once — long sentences and controlled movement — and that combination, not any single population, is what defines the environment. We will not put a number on assault rates here: the Bureau does not publish a per-security-level violence rate in the policy documents that govern designation, and a figure we cannot source is worth nothing to you.

What we can say precisely is what the Bureau’s own designation policy treats as the drivers of institutional risk, because those categories are written into the scoring:

• Validated Disruptive Group membership. A man validated as a member of a Disruptive Group identified in the Central Inmate Monitoring System “will be housed in a High security level institution, unless the PSF has been waived” (PS 5100.08 at p. 56). The Bureau’s design intent is that validated gang leadership sits above medium.
• Prison Disturbance. A guilty finding for engaging in or encouraging a riot, in conjunction with simultaneous institution disruptions, moves men to at least High (PS 5100.08 at p. 59).
• Separations. 28 C.F.R. § 524.72 creates the Central Inmate Monitoring separation assignment for people “who may not be confined in the same institution … with other specified individuals,” including anyone who has testified or given information about others. Separations are why a transfer request gets denied without explanation, and they are appealable through the Administrative Remedy Program under § 524.76.

Contraband enforcement is the other constant. On 2–6 August 2026 the Bureau ran a multi-agency operation at FCI Bennettsville, a medium in South Carolina, recovering electronic devices, drugs, homemade weapons and gang intelligence; forty men were transferred out to other Southeast Region facilities as follow-up (BOP news story, 2 September 2026). If your person disappeared from Bennettsville in August 2026, that is the public record of why. Our page on searches, shakedowns and contraband explains what a sweep looks like from inside, and the black market explains the economy that drives it.

Vulnerable populations at medium-security prisons

Three groups carry disproportionate risk at this level, and the Bureau’s own paperwork is where the exposure usually starts.

People with a Sex Offender Public Safety Factor

The factor applies to “a male or female inmate whose behavior in the current term of confinement or prior history includes one or more of” six enumerated categories, and — critically — a conviction is not required: if the Presentence Report or other official documentation clearly describes the behavior, the factor is applied, including where a plea bargain resulted in conviction of something else (PS 5100.08 at p. 57). Because the PSF sets only a Low floor, points can still carry someone with this factor into a medium. The factor is visible on institutional paperwork, and the resulting exposure is real. See surviving prison as a sex offender and sex offender treatment programs.

People who cooperated

Cooperation shows up in the Presentence Report, in the Statement of Reasons and in the separation assignments under 28 C.F.R. § 524.72. The remedy the system offers is protective custody — which in practice usually means the Special Housing Unit, with the restrictions that go with it. It is a real option and a costly one, and it should be discussed before it becomes urgent.

LGBTQ people, and people with serious mental illness

Housing and programming decisions for these groups run through separate policy: PREA-based sexual-abuse prevention, gender dysphoria management, and the treatment and care of inmates with mental illness. A person whose mental-health care level is CARE3-MH or CARE4-MH is not managed by the security score alone — mental-health care level assignment is a separate track, described at PS 5310.16 at p. 8, and it can route someone to a Federal Medical Center instead.

Every medium-security federal prison, by state

Forty-three institutions, plus Yazoo City Low II (carried on the roster as medium), read from the Bureau’s own facility records. Populations are BOP’s published totals as of the June 2026 capture; where an institution has an adjacent camp or secure female facility, BOP’s total includes it, and the breakdown is shown.

State	Institution	BOP population	Houses	Region
Alabama	FCI Talladega	1,271	Male	Southeast
Arizona	FCI Phoenix	1,072	Male and female	Western
Arizona	FCI Tucson	443	Male and female	Western
Arkansas	FCI Forrest City Medium	1,661	Male	South Central
California	FCI Herlong	769	Male	Western
California	FCI Mendota	818	Male	Western
California	FCI Victorville Medium I	1,580 (1,365 FCI, 215 camp)	Male and female	Western
California	FCI Victorville Medium II	1,262	Male	Western
Colorado	FCI Florence	1,419 (1,012 FCI, 407 camp)	Male	North Central
Florida	FCI Coleman Medium	1,550	Male	Southeast
Florida	FCI Marianna	1,118	Male and female	Southeast
Georgia	FCI Jesup	1,686	Male	Southeast
Illinois	FCI Greenville	1,275	Male and female	North Central
Illinois	FCI Marion	1,203	Male	North Central
Illinois	FCI Pekin	1,303	Male and female	North Central
Indiana	FCI Terre Haute	1,407	Male	North Central
Kansas	FCI Leavenworth	1,614	Male	North Central
Kentucky	FCI Manchester	1,233	Male	Mid-Atlantic
Louisiana	FCI Pollock	1,710	Male	South Central
Maryland	FCI Cumberland	1,157	Male	Mid-Atlantic
Mississippi	FCI Yazoo City Medium	1,461	Male	Southeast
Mississippi	FCI Yazoo City Low II — name says Low, roster says Medium	1,493	Male	Southeast
New Hampshire	FCI Berlin	752	Male	Northeast
New Jersey	FCI Fairton	733	Male	Northeast
New York	FCI Otisville	991	Male	Northeast
New York	FCI Ray Brook	881	Male	Northeast
North Carolina	FCI Butner Medium I	825	Male	Mid-Atlantic
North Carolina	FCI Butner Medium II	1,373	Male	Mid-Atlantic
Oklahoma	FCI El Reno	1,128	Male	South Central
Oregon	FCI Sheridan	1,513	Male	Western
Pennsylvania	FCI Allenwood Medium	1,078	Male	Northeast
Pennsylvania	FCI Lewisburg	1,146	Male	Northeast
Pennsylvania	FCI McKean	1,027	Male	Northeast
Pennsylvania	FCI Schuylkill	1,281	Male	Northeast
South Carolina	FCI Bennettsville	1,379	Male	Southeast
South Carolina	FCI Edgefield	1,643	Male	Southeast
South Carolina	FCI Williamsburg	1,568	Male	Southeast
Texas	FCI Beaumont Medium	1,056	Male	South Central
Texas	FCI Three Rivers	1,176	Male	South Central
Virginia	FCI Petersburg Medium	1,643	Male	Mid-Atlantic
West Virginia	FCI Beckley	1,777	Male	Mid-Atlantic
West Virginia	FCI Gilmer	1,266	Male	Mid-Atlantic
West Virginia	FCI Hazelton	1,614 (1,105 FCI, 509 secure female facility)	Male and female	Mid-Atlantic
West Virginia	FCI McDowell	1,646	Male	Mid-Atlantic

Thirty-three of these forty-three institutions have an adjacent minimum-security satellite camp, a Federal Satellite Low, or a detention center attached, and a thirty-fourth — FCI Hazelton — has a secure female facility on the same grounds. That is why a “medium” address on an inmate locator result does not by itself tell you what kind of housing someone is in. Confirm the specific unit through the BOP Inmate Locator or the unit team.

Three things that changed in 2025 and 2026

Almost nothing published about federal security levels reflects the last eighteen months. Three items do matter.

PS 5100.08 has been amended three times

CN-1 (4 September 2019) rewrote the placement language to match the First Step Act, inserting the “within 500 driving miles of that residence” standard into the Introduction, into Management Variable D (Release Residence), and into the nearer-release transfer rule. CN-2 (6 March 2025) added definitions of female, male, sex, man and woman to Chapter 2. CN-3 (6 May 2026) rewrote Section 1, adding that under 28 U.S.C. § 509 the Attorney General may in certain circumstances exercise the designation authority directly, consistent with 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b), and that absent such notice the Bureau follows its own procedures. All three are printed at the front of PS 5100.08 at the current PDF.

FCI Yazoo City “Low II” is classified MEDIUM on BOP’s live roster while continuing to display the name “Yazoo City Low II FCI.” The Bureau’s own facility page text still says “low security.” This is the only security-level discrepancy across the Bureau’s 118 institution records, and it changes custody-scoring expectations, programming and transfer analysis. Do not rely on the name; confirm with the unit team or the DSCC.

Facilities are closing

The Bureau’s 1 July 2026 press release announced the closure of Beaumont FCI Low, Big Spring FCI and its camp, La Tuna FCI/FSL/camp, the Lexington FMC satellite camp, Petersburg FCI Low and Taft FCI, and the conversion of Morgantown and Duluth camps into Federal Satellite Lows — citing a deferred-maintenance backlog exceeding $4 billion. None of the closures is a medium, but every closure pushes people into the levels that remain, and bed pressure is a documented Management Variable (“Population Management,” expiring in up to 18 months, PS 5100.08 at p. 55). We track the full picture on major federal prison closures and deactivations.

Several institutions everyone still calls penitentiaries are now mediums

FCI Marion, FCI Leavenworth and FCI Lewisburg are all carried on BOP’s roster as medium-security Federal Correctional Institutions. Published lists that still show them as USPs are out of date.

How people move out of medium security

There are only a few doors, and they are all named in Chapter 7 of PS 5100.08.

Code 308 — Lesser Security

When a custody review lowers the score enough that the security level changes, “transfer of the inmate to a lower security level institution should be considered,” and the case must be referred to the DSCC for either transfer or application of a Management Variable (PS 5100.08 at p. 86). The transfer code for a move to less security is 308 (PS 5100.08 at p. 103).

Custody-driven moves out of a medium

Because a medium cannot house COMMUNITY custody, the Bureau’s own worked example is a medium-security man at OUT custody who becomes eligible for COMMUNITY: “the inmate would normally be referred for redesignation to a Low or Minimum security level facility, since Medium security level institutions do not house COMMUNITY custody inmates” (PS 5100.08 at p. 86). The mirror image also holds: a medium-security man raised to MAXIMUM custody must go to a high-security penitentiary, because mediums are not authorized for MAXIMUM.

Code 313 — Nearer Release

These transfers move someone closer to the release destination “consistent with their security level,” and may be considered only after 18 consecutive months of clear conduct in general population (PS 5100.08 at p. 87). CN-1 removed the old bar that ended consideration once a person was already inside 500 driving miles; further referrals can now be considered, subject to bed availability, security designation, programmatic and health needs, faith-based requests, and court recommendations.

Code 307 — Greater Security, and Code 309 — Disciplinary, run the other way. A disciplinary transfer follows misconduct and documented poor institutional adjustment (PS 5100.08 at p. 103); the underlying process is the inmate discipline program.

Custody classification itself has a rhythm. The first custody score happens at the first program review, roughly seven months after arrival at the institution; after that, reviews occur at least every 12 months, with off-cycle scoring only for changes that move the overall level — a refused Financial Responsibility Program, an incident report, a new sentence, a sentence reduction (PS 5100.08 at p. 63).

Where families get stuck with medium-security placement

“The judge recommended a camp and he ended up at a medium.”

A court’s facility recommendation is a factor the Bureau must consider under 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b)(4)(B) — it is not binding. It goes in the “REC FACILITY” field on the BP-337 and, if entered as a valid facility code, “will appear at the top of the list presented to the Designator” (PS 5100.08 at p. 38). Points and Public Safety Factors still control the level.

“Nobody will tell us why he can’t transfer.”

Usually the answer is a separation assignment under 28 C.F.R. § 524.72(f), and notice of a separation deliberately “will not include the names of those from whom the inmate must be separated” (§ 524.73(b)). The classification is appealable at any time through the Administrative Remedy Program.

“The Presentence Report says something that isn’t true, and now it follows him.”

It does, and this is the most consequential fixable problem at this level. Severity of Current Offense, Criminal History Score, and the Sex Offender PSF are all scored off the Presentence Report and the Statement of Reasons. There is also a route inside the Bureau that almost nobody uses: on arrival, the institution’s Case Management Coordinator reviews the classification material and verifies the scoring of the BP-337, and “if a scoring issue and/or error is discovered, the CMC will contact the DSCC Administrator” — with disagreements decided by the Central Office Correctional Programs Administrator (PS 5100.08 at p. 27). Correcting the underlying record, as opposed to the score, is a legal matter and belongs with counsel — see the federal inmate transfer process and securing the right transfer.

“He’s been there five years and nothing has changed.”

Ask three specific questions at the next program review: what is the current security point total, what Public Safety Factors are applied, and what Management Variable is on the file with what expiration date. Those three answers explain almost every placement, and they are on paperwork the person is entitled to see under 28 C.F.R. § 524.43.

Working with our team on a designation or a transfer

Elizabeth Franklin-Best, P.C. is a nationwide federal practice with more than 20 years of federal and appellate criminal defense experience, run on an intentionally small caseload from offices in Columbia and Mount Pleasant, South Carolina. On the prison side, our work at this level is specific and documentary: reading the Presentence Report and Statement of Reasons against the BP-337 and BP-338, identifying scoring items that were entered wrong, identifying Public Safety Factors applied on documentation that does not support them, and building the referral package that a unit team and the DSCC will actually act on. Where a scoring problem traces back to the underlying record, the legal work is handled by Elizabeth Franklin-Best and the firm’s attorneys.

We cannot promise a transfer, a security-level reduction, or any other outcome, and no one honestly can — designation and redesignation are discretionary decisions of the Bureau under 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b). What we can do is make sure the decision is being made on an accurate record. If you want to talk it through, contact our office at (843) 620-1100. If the larger question is getting out earlier rather than moving sideways, start with federal prison early release, compassionate release, or First Step Act time credits.

For the other levels, see minimum security, low security, high security, administrative security and federal medical centers, or the overview at federal prison security levels.

Frequently Asked Questions About Medium-Security Prisons

Authorities Cited

Every source relied on above, cited in full and linked once. Page references in the text are to the editions listed here.

• BOP Program Statement 5100.08 — U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Inmate Security Designation and Custody Classification (Sept. 12, 2006), as amended by Change Notice CN-3 (May 6, 2026)
• BOP Program Statement 5310.16 — U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Treatment and Care of Inmates with Mental Illness (May 1, 2014), as amended by Change Notice CN-1 (Feb. 18, 2025)
• 18 U.S.C. § 3621 — Imprisonment of a convicted person
• 28 C.F.R. pt. 524 — Classification of Inmates
• 28 C.F.R. § 524.11 — Process for classification and program reviews
• 28 C.F.R. § 524.72 — CIM assignment categories (Subpart F — Central Inmate Monitoring System)
• BOP news release, Sept. 2, 2026 — Federal Bureau of Prisons, Multi-Agency Operation Conducted at FCI Bennettsville
• BOP press release, July 1, 2026 — Federal Bureau of Prisons, Facility Closures and Conversions

Reviewed for legal accuracy by Elizabeth Franklin-Best, Esq., Principal Attorney·September 2026