Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
(b) (6)
Check with TCA....I believe they have spoken with Forest Service and the land manager is ameniable.
(b)
(6)
----- Original Message -----
From: (b) (6)
To (b) (6)
(b)
(6)
In addition, D-5A was covered in the August 2007 Biological Opinion. If the decision is made to extend
the fence an additional 4.056 miles, in addition to supplementing the EA we will them have to reinitiate
consultation with the service.
(b) (6)
________________________________
(b)
(6)
I will be out of the net next week attending the VB 300 Scheduling meeting.
I have reviewed the FEA dated October 2007 that was produced for D-5A and we do not have coverage
for this additional 4.056 miles of pedestrian fence. The EA only addresses the construction of primary
pedestrian fence from 0.5 miles west of the Mariposa POE extending westward for 2.4 miles.
The addition of this 4.056 miles of fence can only be covered now by Supplementing the October 2007
document.
(b) (6)
________________________________
All
Please review the attached change request and advise on any issues that you see relative your area of
expertise. If approved, this would become a contingency segment. Please provide your
feedback/comments by next Thursday, Feb 14th.
Thanks
(b)
(6)
________________________________
(b)
(6)
Attached is the D-5A Extension Form as requested. (b) will need to complete the Cost and Schedule
Adjustment blanks. (6)
Thanks
(b) (6)
Tucson Sector
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
________________________________
(b)
(6)
The attached change request form needs to be completed for all requested scope modifications
associated with PF255. Please seek input from the Corps’ relative to the estimated cost and schedule
impacts. You can attach your “white paper” to the submittal as your justification and description of
change. Once we receive the completed request from you, we will submit to the PF225 Change Control
Board for review and recommendation. Loren Flossman will make the final go/no go decision.
Thanks
(b)
(6)
________________________________
(b)
(6)
Tucson Sector is requesting to extend the PF 225 Nogales D5A project by an additional 4.056 miles to
the west to meet current operational requirements. Currently D5B (5.4) and D6 (2.2) extend the
Nogales Fence to the east by 7.6 miles. D5A currently only extends the fence out two additional miles
to the Westside of the Mariposa POE.
The additional 4.056 miles will extend far enough to the west to significantly enhance operational
control on Nogales’s western urban side.
Thanks
(b) (6)
Tucson Sector
(b) (6)
________________________________
Sir,
I recommend we support this request and push it forward as this will take the west side fence as far as
we can go for now, essentially finishing it there.
Thanks,
(b
)
________________________________
This is an updated TI request subsequent to the ACE General’s visit last week. TI (b) (6) is
on board and this has passed the local laugh test. We respectfully request consideration and support.
V/R, (b
)
(b) (6)
1500 W. La Quinta
Nogales, AZ 85621
(b) (6)
________________________________
Sirs,
Can we please modify this paper to address the request for the additional 4 miles of fencing to the
west. We will address the landing mat fencing after we have all primary infrastructure in first. Naco is
having the same issue.
Also please route requests for new issues/ projects through Sector first. TCA will then route to OBP and
the ACE.
Thanks
(b) (6)
Tucson Sector
(b) (6)
(b) (6) Cell
________________________________
From:(b) (6)
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 8:26 AM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: (b) (6)
Please see attached. The landing mat is being breached at a rate not seen before. This is most
definitely attributable to the bollard fence adjacent to it.
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
PF225 Change Request
Change Request Number: (SBI to assign) Change Request Date:
ASAP
USBP Sector: Project/Map ID:
Tucson (TCA)
Corps Project Manager: USBP Section TI Coordinator:
(b) (6) (b) (6)
Change Requested By
Name: Teleph one Number:
(b) (6) (b) (6)
E-mail Address: Fax Number:
(b) (6) (b) (6)
3/22/2010
Cost Adjustment $
Notes
The additional fencing will eliminate “drive through” traffic as far west as the
“Summit Motor Way” and the “Bear Valley” areas where agents can easily
intercept the violators. The requested fence would force foot traffic as far west
as the Calabasas Campground area where agents would be better able to
intercept them. Although the areas are more remote, the requested fence would
act as a force multiplier allowing for the additional agents to respond in greater
numbers to the exposed areas.
Approval Signature
_________________________________________ ___________________
Loren Flossman, PF225 SBI TI Project Manager Date
3/22/2010
Nogales Station Tactical Infrastructure and Facilities
Special Project Funding Request
January 20, 2008
BACKGROUND:
The Nogales Station is curr ently in the process of ha ving a bollard style f ence
installed on the west side of the Nogales Area of Responsibility (AOR) in support
of the PF225 project. The current project in Nogales is identified as the D-5A
Fence Project. The Request F or Propos al (RFP) that was disseminated and
eventually awarded as a contract calls fo r 2 miles of fence stretching from the
existing Landing Mat fence to the crest of the ridge that overlooks Green Canyon
to the west and Mariposa Canyon to the east.
Sundt Construction Company has already in stalled t he first mile of the D-5A
Fence and may complete the project as early as six weeks ahead of schedule.
Since this fence has gone into place, alien and narcotics smuggle rs have shifted
their illicit activities both to the east and west. To the east of the D-5A F ence,
they dig under the existing landing mat fence in order to enter the United States.
The smuggling of narc otics and i llegal aliens has shifte d to the west of the D-5A
Fence as reflected in the increase in narcotics seizures and a rise in ille gal alien
apprehensions. The D5-A Fenc e is frustr ating smugglers as demonstrated by
the recent increase in aggression against the agents, most notably in the number
of rocking assaults.
If the D5-A Fence was extended further to the west than is presently planned, it
would significantly benefit Border Patrol enforcement efforts. The bollard s tyle
fence needs to be built an additional 4.056 miles to the west. The fence would
then abut rough, mountainous terrain forcing vehicles and aliens illegally entering
the United States to travel into areas where the probabi lity of detection,
interdiction and arrest would be greatly enhanced.
Assessment:
The benefits of the bollard style fencing ar e evident: illegal entries into the United
States dec rease where the bo llard fence is in plac e a nd the bollard style fe nce
lessens the threat potential against Border Patrol Agents by allowing them to see
through the fence into Mexico. Currently, to the west of the D5-A Fence Proj ect,
there are barbed wire fences and some Normandy-style vehicle barriers.
Replacing these imperfect f ences with a bollard style fence would signific antly
increase the security of the United States’ border.
JUSTIFICATION:
The const ruction company current ly has the required equipment and
manpower available to meet the additional proposed demands. The
government would have to expend add itional money and resources to
complete t his project at a later da te, adding additional costs and manpower
that would be taken away from other pr ojects criti cal to Nogales Station
operations.
The additional length of fence would provide additional safety to the agents by
forcing the smugglers into areas that can be more easily monitored and
controlled, allowing for a more unifo rm, safe and effective response in
addressing illegal entries into the United States.
(b) (7)(E)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended this request be giv en priori ty cons ideration to allow time for
agents and equipment to be repositioned to areas where they can serve more
effectively.
Placing a 4.056 mile long bo llard style fence to the we st of t he current D5-A
Fence Project will e liminate vehicular driv e through traffic as far west as th e
Summit Motor Way and the Bear Valley areas. In thes e locations, Border Patrol
Agents ca n more easily interce pt illega l e ntries. The requested fence would
force illegal pedestrian entri es as far west as t he Calabasas Campground area
where agents would be better able to inte rcept them. Although the areas are
more remote, the requested fence would act as a f orce multiplier allowing for
additional agents to respond in greater numbers.
CONCLUSION:
The additional 4.056 miles (linear feet ) of fence is crucial t o stopping and
redirecting the smuggling of illegal al iens and narcotics into areas where law
enforcement agents are more r eadily able to successfully intercept the violators
and disrupt their illic it operations. A prim ary concern is the safety of both l aw
enforcement officers and the general pub lic. The proposed fence supports the
National Strategy.
Location Requested:
Monument 127
(b) (7)(E)
222 Road
(b) (7)(E)
(b) (7)(E)
31