FME004173

Customs and Border Protection Meeting Minutes

Secure Border Initiative Program Management Office

Meeting Title – PF225 PMT/FEIT

Meeting Date – October 11
Meeting Time – 9:15 A.M. (EST)

Purpose
To conduct weekly FEIT meetings to discuss issues, progress and action items.

Attendees
Attended via CBP
Telecon
(b) (6) –Technical SME Manager
(b) (6) – Real Estate SME
(b) (6) –Project Control
(b) (6) –Communications IPT
(b) (6) - OBP, FEIT
(b) (6) – OBP, FEIT
(b) (6) – Asset Management
(b) (6) - PM Asset Management
Marfa & El Paso Sectors
Loren Flossman – PF225 PM
(b) (6) – PF225 BM
(b) (6) – PF225 TI Deputy PM
(b) (6) – Program Support
(b) (6) - OFAM
USACE

√ (b) (6)

√ (b) (6)

√ (b) (6)

√ (b) (6)

√ (b) (6)

√ (b) (6)

CBP/SBInet
Meeting Minutes 11/9/2010 1
 FME004174

√ (b) (6)

√ (b) (6)

√ (b) (6)

√ (b) (6)

√ (b) (6)

CBP/SBInet
Meeting Minutes 11/9/2010 2
 FME004175

Discussion Overview
Topics Covered during the Meeting

Agenda:
o Program Issues
o Schedule
o Progress on ROE for I
o Standard Designs –Coordination with Border Patrol
o IBWC MOU update
o Sector Calls to confirm fence alignment
o SBI issues
o IPT Issues
o Real Estate
o Engineering
o Environmental
o Action Items

Discussion:
o ROE for I (formerly S & E)
o Issues in CA
 Missing data between San Diego and Tuscan (A-1)
 Can’t gather data due to private landowners that are not on property and have
not yet been contacted
o Outreach
o Problems with how Tuscan handled the outreach for ROE for I
 Sent a letter to landowners in which it stated in the letter to respond within 2
weeks of receiving it
 This should have occurred face-to-face unless this is impossible
 All correspondence should have been reviewed by Mr. Giddens prior to going
public
 There are no ROEs for I for Phase I in Tuscan Sector
 The sectors need to realize that all real estate activity from now on needs to be
partnered with USACE
o RGV
o ROEs for I have been obtained for 30 of the 70 landowners in RGV
o 4 owners won’t sell at all
o Expect a lot of questions before owners will sell
o Owners want to see the fence first
 Need to know where the gates are going
 Need to track these things to help with the execution of construction contract
 Design-bid-build for all of Phase II will solve this issue – Toolbox
o Need to firm this up
o IBWC-MOU update

CBP/SBInet
Meeting Minutes 11/9/2010 3
 FME004176

o Finalizing the draft now

o USACE is concerned about ?
 Will document ?
 Need to know conditions and level of documentation on levee
 We should only need to evaluate area where we will be building on the
levee
 CBP will release and indemnify IBWC of claim costs, review, etc.
 IBWC will approve design of all fences
o USACE held the first levee design IPT with ?
 Goal is to take initial briefing and flush it out and come up with viable options
because the retaining wall is (b) (5) – other less expensive options are
needed
 Want a design that floats on the levee so the fence can be collapsed
during floods
 A levee by itself doesn’t do anything – access roads need to be included
 Concept drawings to Baker are to be vetted by the 23rd of Oct
 Final version to put into RFPs by 20 November
o Will be workshopped with stakeholders in two weeks in Ft. Worth
to come up with preliminary concept designs including a levee
design
o Workshop for 90% solution and vet through the sectors, FWS and
IBWC
 Refined, tweaked from Fence Lab designs
 We are closer to a solution for non-levee fence but not a floating fence design
which is holding up K-1 in El Paso
o Alignment status
o Del Rio – retaining wall is needed in one portion
o El Paso – Good
o RGV – miles still changing
 Need to work with the sector because they are GPSing every day when it’s not
necessary
 Once the levee design is finalized it needs to be explained to them at the
sector, that the laydown is permanent
 Once miles are assigned they should not be changed
 They have taken miles from the middle segment and placed them on O-1
o Marfa – good
o Stay with current alignment
 Maps are on USACE site but not on the ECSO yet
 These will soon be placed on ECSO and RGV will then look at them
o Need approval document – 3 options
o 1st option - ?
o 2nd option - ?
o 3rd option – modified version of the Secure Fence Act is the most defendable
alternative to include in DOPPA
 Have DOPPAs been approved? – Yes

CBP/SBInet
Meeting Minutes 11/9/2010 4
 FME004177

 DOPPA language should read the same in all documents

 Double layer fence with patrol roads, drag roads and lights – no tertiary fence

Action Items:
 (b) (6) to take outreach letter and forward to (b) to start processing; need it
(6)
approved ASAP
 USACE to provide 95% - 97% solution to final alignment this week
 (b) (6) to follow up on ROEs for I for Tuscan; USACE to provide all of them
 (b) (6) to talk with Asset Management to see who will attend the IPR in two weeks
 (b) (6) to discuss IBWC document with Norma Edwards tomorrow
 (b) (6) to send OBP standards to Glenn Bixler for the gates
 (b) (6) to send Glenn Bixler gates requirements based OBPs standards
 Lead of each FEIT to set up meeting time with (b) (6) to go over risks
o (b) (6) to meet with (b) (6) tomorrow

Previous Action Items

 (b) (6) to provide USACE hard copies of ROE’s for S&E already executed by OBP
USACE to identify people to work with IBWC to go through boxes of records and identify
easements
 (b) (6) – Arrange design brief/presentation on gate toolkit; gather info from the OBP
field and from (b) (6) research w/ Bureau of Prisons
 (b) (6) to supply OBP standard fence concepts for their approval and subsequent
direction to the USACE/Baker to begin design efforts
Scheduled for next week
 (b) (6) – provide SBI with commitment for due date on risk statements; also
provide SBI copy of power point presentation used to brief USACE PM’s on risk
management
 USACE to identify people to work with IBWC to go through boxes of records and identify
easements
o In-progress
 Risk owners to provide (b) (6) risks and mitigation strategies on Monday
 USACE to update fence summary to reflect contingency miles identified during the weeks
of 17 September site visits
 USACE to provide a conceptual retaining wall design proposed for O-1 and M-2A
 (b) (6) and (b) (6) to schedule site visits for contingency miles

Completed Action Items

 (b) (6) to provide SBI with ROE-S&E status update as soon as (b) (6) has
data assembled – should advise today with proposed due date
 (b) (6) to provide start dates for Appraisal and Phase 1 contamination
surveys for parcels where ROE’s for S&E are already executed
 (b) (6) – work together to formulate and authorize budget
increase for GIS services
 (b) (6) – Distribute Fence Alignment Maps

CBP/SBInet
Meeting Minutes 11/9/2010 5
 FME004178

 (b) (6) to meet with (b) (6) today to finalize Segment A-1
access road guidance to the USACE (b) (6)
 USACE to provide list (98%) solution with OBP color designations for planning
aspects to serve as the roadmap to engage green property owners
 (b) (6) to talk with (b) (6) and edit MOU with IBWC to state that
USACE have access to enter properties they own to construct and maintain fence

Meeting attended/minutes prepared by: (b) (6)

Date: 18 October 2007

CBP/SBInet
Meeting Minutes 11/9/2010 6