OBP004655

From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Fence Gates Wednesday, March 05, 2008 3:38:27 PM

(b) (6) Rather than multiple e-mails, I wanted to sum up some of the discussion about fence gates from the Corps perspective. We looked at two aspects, locking mechanisms and gates themselves. Bottom line, keep it simple is the recommendation.
Locks: Mechanical/key type, cipher, card readers, electronic. Mechanical or key is the simplest but the risk is lost, duplicated or shared keys. The other three require electricity. In populated areas or where an electrical drop can be run from a house, this may not be a problem. In rural areas, this could be a problem. One solution could be solar powered batteries. The other option that you have discussed is a camera with remote control openings. Little more complicated but keeps access control in the hands of the border patrol. Also consider scheduled openings by agents on remote sites. Gates: Again, simpler is recommended. The more mechanical, the greater possibility of breakdowns and/or disablement. Swing gates. Work well for manually operated gates. Locking mechanisms can be included. Rolling gates. Work well for larger access requirements. Rocks or foreign objects jammed into tracks or mechanisms may foul the gates. I've asked our engineers to continue to research other options. As these become available, we will pass them on. V/R

(b) (6) (b) (6) Colonel, Corps of Engineers Military Deputy for Customs & Border Protection Projects SW Division, US Army Corps of Engineers (b) (6) (Cell) (b) (6) (DC Office)