Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Fyi
(b) (6)
Thanks
(b) (6)
Special Operations Supervisor
SBInet
Yuma Sector
(b) (6)
All,
We are reaching out to each of your sectors to verify what type of vehicle fence design you require in
your AOR’s. I’ve attached a spread sheet that identifies map ID and planned mileage. Would you please
fill in the block that stipulates fence type and send it back to me. Please keep in mind that the design
should be operationally driven. If you anticipate that your vehicle fence may need to incorporate
pedestrian fence in the future because of operations then VF-1 (rail on post) should be selected over
VF-2 (Normandy style). Consequently if the terrain is harsh and rocky, severely sloped, sandy soil, etc.
then VF-2 may be the best choice. You guys know your area’s better than most, so we are depending
on your input to ensure you get what you need for your sectors.
Lastly, I will need a brief justification for the designs you picked (VF-1 or VF-2) for each map ID, as well
as why VF was preferred over PF or no fencing in those areas,for future GAO audits.
Thanks
(b) (6)
(A)SOS
(b) (6)
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. Parts of this document may contain sensitive security information
that is controlled under the provisions of 49 CFR 1520. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
(Cum.) Military Comm.
Congres Planned Planned Mileage mileage
sional Contingency Core left to left to
Map ID SBI Project # Location District Mileage Mileage construct construct
Previous
Projects 51 5.22 0.0 0.0
SDC SECTOR TOTAL 0.00 5.2
BV-1 2248-1 ELC/ELS 51 11.3 0.0 11.3
Previous
Projects 51 10.8 0.0 0.0
ELC SECTOR TOTAL 0.00 22.2
Papago
DV-3a 1023-4 TCA/AJO Farms 7 15.48 0.00 9.74
Papago
DV-3b 1023-5 TCA/AJO Farms 7 0.41 0.4 0.0
Tohono
O'Odham
DV-4a 1024-3 TCA/CAG Nation 7 19.36 0.00 19.36
Tohono
O'Odham
DV-4b 1024-4 TCA/CAG Nation 7 12.94 3.84 0.00
FV-1a 2203-1 TCA/DGL Douglas 8 2.00 2.00 0.00
Sierra De La
DV-2 2205-1 TCA/AJO Nariz Mtn. 7 1.52 0.00 1.52
DV-5 2206-1 TCA/TUC Baboquivari 7 3.03 0.00 3.03
Previous
Projects 7 45.28 0.00 0.00
Previous
Projects 8 13.13 0.00 0.00
TCA SECTOR TOTAL 6.78 154.2
Comm.
0.0 4.8 4.8 TBD Bollard
Miltary
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Normandy
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Post on Rail
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Post on Rail
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Post on Rail
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Post on Rail
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Normandy
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Normandy
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Normandy
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Normandy
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Normandy
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Normandy
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Normandy
already
0.0 0.0 0.0 built Normandy
Miltary.
0.0 1.2 1.2 TBD Post on Rail
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Normandy
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Normandy
Comm.
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Normandy
Milary. Jersey
0.0 0.0 0.0 TBD Barrier
NTP given 28 Jan for cultural resources site survey; contract will
most likely need to be design build. ROE for S&E being finalized
by USBP.
West Edge of Organ Pipe 15.5 miles to Yuma County Line (Yuma PDT) Fed
Starting at 1.52 miles east of Border Monument 159. Continuing east
along the border for 15.26 miles, On the Tohono O'odham Indian
Reservation, between the Santa Rosa Mountains and the La Lesna
Mountains.
La Lesna Mountain Drive Through Area
BM 65 to BM 68
VF From 0.25 Miles East of BM39 East Past BM 33 - 12.85 Miles State & Fed (BLM)
VF From East Side of AR#6 East to 413 Road [CR004] - 18 Miles State & Fed (BLM)
VF from 413 Road [CR004] East to BM7 - 12 Miles State & Fed (BLM)
9.9 Miles of VF West of STN POE [Starting 1.25 Miles West of POE to
BM7] State & Fed (BLM)
City of El Paso for access, IBWC
180 LF VF Under Ysleta POE Bridge for staging
Environmental
Status
VF-300
CV-1a
This project is from Morelos Dam south approximately six miles and is entirely within
the Colorado River flood plane. Infrastructure added to this area must not disrupt the
flow of water in the event of a flood. In addition, the International Boundary and Water
Commission (IBWC) on both the U. S. and Mexican sides must approve the design of the
planned infrastructure. Exhaustive research and planning revealed that the post on rail
design (VF-1) would be the most durable and least intrusive solution.
CV-1b
This project is the extension of CV-1a and also lies entirely in the Colorado River flood
plane however, this project is also within the Cocopah Indian Reservation. In addition to
the IBWC treaty and flood issues, this land is sovereign and the project design requires
the approval of the Cocopah Tribe. Meetings with the tribe regarding the design resulted
in the decision to use post on rail as it was the least intrusive physically as well as
visually.
CV-2
This project covers approximately ten miles on the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife
Refuge. This is an environmentally and archeologically sensitive area, and a design with
the least amount of impact to the area was needed. Lengthy discussions with the United
Stated Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Land Management revealed that post and
rail is the more durable, permanent solution and still allows for the natural migration of
native wildlife.
CV-3
This project covers approximately twenty miles and is also completely contained within
the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge. As in CV-2, the area is sensitive and needs
the least intrusive design however; this portion also contains many rocky hills and
mountains. These hills and mountains pose a significant challenge to drilling the
necessary holes for the post and rail design. The Normandy style (VF-2) alleviates this
challenge and can be placed in such a way so that vehicles may not easily traverse the
sides of the obstacle.