El Paso Sector (J-2)

Deployment Analysis

Location: Santa Teresa, New Mexico – 3.49 Miles of Urban Area

Key Issues/Constraints:
• The city of Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, and Colonia Rancho Anapra, with a
combined population of almost 2 million, lies just east of the proposed J-2 project.
(b) (7)(E)

• The west end of the project is located one mile east of the Santa Teresa Port of
Entry which is only operational from 6:00 A.M. to 10 P.M.
• Union Ganadera Regional de Chihuahua operates a cattle import/export business
spanning both sides of the border at the west end of the project. A series of
breaches through the cattle pens has resulted in a significant fine being imposed
on the company. (b) (7)(E)

• A Mexican military incursion occurred in the project area on March 14, 2000.
During the incursion, a Border Patrol Agent was forced to retreat more than a
mile north of the border while being pursued by Mexican soldiers in Humvees.
The soldiers fired shots at the agent and other agents who came to his assistance.
• At the west end of the project, the tolerance of depth to intrusion is seconds to
minutes for both pedestrian and vehicle entries.
• At the east end of the project, the tolerance of depth to intrusion is minutes for
vehicles and minutes to over an hour for pedestrians.
(b) (7)(E)

• There are two new fencing projects immediately adjacent to the east and west
ends of this project that are scheduled for completion on May 17, 2008. Project J-
3 is composed of 1.08 miles of a hybrid pedestrian/vehicle fence on the east side
of the project area. Project J-1 is composed of 2.3 miles of the same type of fence
on the west side of the project. (b) (7)(E)

• The J-2 project area is crisscrossed with north/south and east/west dirt access
roads. (b) (7)(E)

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1

 • The El Paso Metropolitan area, a major transportation hub via air, rail, and
vehicle, is in the immediate vicinity. (b) (7)(E)

Nature of the Threat:

• Fiscal Year 2007 statistics for the project area include: 1669 apprehensions; 477
getaways; 1041 turn backs; 5 vehicle drive throughs; 23 human smuggling cases;
9 narcotic smuggling cases; narcotics seizures valued at $2,376,328.00 and
vehicle seizures valued at $87,280.00.
(b) (7)(E)

• Agents have the ability to detect entries, (b) (7)(E)

(b) (7)(E)

Alternatives Analysis:
• Baseline – (b) (7)(E)

The current border security level for the

project provides an “Initial Control Capabilities Established” status.
• Sensors – Standard ground sensors are on the most frequented routes of travel.
Due to the expansiveness of the area and the terrain aspects, an inordinate number
of sensors would be required.
(b) (7)(E)

o (b) (7)(E) , which

would total $921,360 for the project (not including 3 year maintenance).
o The sector chief anticipates the deployment of additional sensors
combined with the current deployment baseline will facilitate increased
detection capabilities, but will not enhance identification, classification or
response requirements.
• Cameras - The deployment of cameras would provide surveillance of the project
area, but would not prevent or impede the entry of illegal cross-border traffic.
(b) (7)(E)

o The total cost is estimated to be $5.1 million for the project segment.
o The sector chief anticipates the deployment of cameras combined with the
current deployment baseline will aid in detection and facilitate increased
identification and classification capabilities, but will not enhance

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 2

 deterrence or response requirements that the pedestrian fence alternative
provides.
• Mobile / Tower Surveillance Radar - Surveillance Radar would be well suited
for this project area (b) (7)(E)

o (b) (7)(E) which would

total $1,308,000 for the two trucks
o (b) (7)(E)

excluding the cost of access roads.

o Total estimated cost to include 3 year maintenance for radar solution is
approximately $2 million.
o The sector chief anticipates the deployment of Mobile Surveillance Radar
combined with the current baseline deployment will facilitate increased
detection and identification capabilities, but will not enhance the
persistence of impedance that the pedestrian fence will provide.
• Border Patrol Agent – Border Patrol Agents are capable of detecting entries,
identifying and classifying the threat and responding to, (b) (7)(E)

(b) (7)(E)

o The cost of employing the additional agents would come to a total of

$221,400,000 over a three year period.
o The sector chief anticipates the deployment (b) (7)(E)

would be
deficient in the ability to execute and sustain when compared to the
pedestrian fence.
• Vehicle Fence – The deployment of vehicle fence in the project area would not
deter or impede pedestrian traffic.
o The cost is estimated to be $2 million per mile, which would total
approximately $9.9 million (including 3 year maintenance cost) across the
project area not including any road construction or improvements.
o The sector chief anticipates the deployment of the vehicle fence combined
with the current baseline deployment will not enhance detection,
identification, classification and response requirements.
• Pedestrian Fence – The pedestrian fence would significantly deter and impede
entries by both vehicles and foot traffic, which would allow much greater
response time to agents.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 3

 o It is estimated that Pedestrian fence across the project area would cost a
total of $5.1 million a mile, which would total $17,813,821 to cover the
3.49 mile project area ( $23.2 million with 3 year maintenance cost).
o The sector chief anticipates the deployment of the pedestrian fence
combined with the current baseline deployment will enhance detection,
identification, classification and response requirements. In addition, the
pedestrian fence provides the necessary persistence of impedance
requirement that facilitates long term sustainability.
• Technology Mix – An analysis of technology components was conducted to
determine what component of technology would be most cost effective. Based on
the analysis conducted by the Field Commanders and the Sector Chief, the most
cost effective combination of technology mix for the J-2 segment was determined
to be ground sensors combined with tower based / mobile ground surveillance
radar and long-range digital cameras.

Key Evaluation Factors:

(b) (7)(E)

• The operational cost of the total number of agents deployed to gain and maintain
effective control of the area preclude any significant deployment of agents to
address shifts in smuggling activity to other areas within the Santa Teresa area of
operations.
• The installation of technology only solutions will not provide the required level of
deterrence and persistence of impedance that a pedestrian fence can provide.

Recommended Solution:
• Deploy pedestrian fence in the J-2 project area to deter vehicles from illegally
entering the United States and to discourage the act of “fleeing at a high rate of
speed” back into Mexico. The fencing will also have a deterrent effect on illegal
entrants attempting to enter on foot. The deterrent effect will force alien traffic
into other areas within the Santa Teresa area of operations with a greater tolerance
to depth of intrusion.
• Deploy radar and cameras providing overlapping surveillance of the fence.
When alerted by sensors or radar hit, agents will have more time to respond and
resolve the intrusion as the vehicle smugglers will be forced to illegally enter the
U.S. on foot.
• Deploy visual deterrence systems (lights that may be activated by camera
operators) for nighttime deterrence, and audio systems (speakers that allow
operators to “talk” to potential illegal entrants to let them know they have been
detected and will face arrest if they continue into the U.S.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 4

 • Deploy Border Patrol Agents in a mobile capacity, patrolling the fence and
responding when the technology systems detect and cannot deter an individual or
group from entering.

Projected Results:
• Deterrence of vehicle incursions.
• Deterrence of illegal entrants on foot through certainty of arrest.
• Significantly fewer agents will be required to maintain control in this area.
• Create the ability to re-allocate hundreds of thousands of dollars in yearly salaries
for a one-time cost of tactical infrastructure and technology deployment.
• Agents will be available to expand operations to the rural flanks to address the
shift in smuggling patterns.
• Increased level of effective control will be established.
• The proposed enhancement is expected to raise the border security status to a
sustainable level of “Initial Control Capabilities Established”. The combination
of personnel, technology and resources should increase the project area to the
level of “Effective Control”.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 5