El Centro Sector (B5-A)

Deployment Analysis

Location: El Centro, California – 19.5 Miles of Undeveloped Desert Area

Key Issues/Constraints:
• The eastern edge of this area is adjacent to the Imperial Valley Sand Dunes
Recreational Area. There is a high volume of frequent and seasonal off road usage
throughout the eastern 2 miles of this area. In the absence of fence, the general
public and smugglers can cross the border at will.
o Up to 50,000 people and thousands of vehicles can be present on a holiday
weekend.
• The majority of this area consists of flat and open desert which is covered with
sparse to moderate vegetation in the form of creosote bushes. Overall visibility is
fair with vegetation providing some concealment. Vegetation height in this area
ranges from 2-10 feet.
• The U.S./Mexico border is close to both Interstate 8 and State Highway 98 in this
area.
o This results in an unfavorable time-distance ratio that requires a tactical
infrastructure solution to deter illegal entries into the U.S. via vehicle and
a foot.
o Distance from the border ranges from .37 miles to 1.5 miles to either
Interstate 8 or State Highway 98. Due to lack of a contiguous physical
barrier, the persistent impedance factor is low.
• The Herman Schneider Memorial Bridge provides quick access to Interstate 8 and
is merely 0.37 miles from the border.
• All-American Canal (AAC) acts as a man made barrier throughout the area that
has some pedestrian and vehicle deterrent effect.
• Access to the area is limited to four locations across the 19.5 mile stretch. Access
points are Gray’s Well, Gordon’s Well, Drop 2, Drop 3, and Drop 4. Drops 2, 3,
and 4 are bridges that cross over the All-American Canal. Each drop is secured
with locked gates (b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

• The AAC is a major terrain hazard. There have been three drownings and four
rescues in the last 3 years. Agents working in this area face the safety risks
associated with falling in deep swift-moving water.
o Agent James Epling drowned in the AAC not far from this segment after
successfully rescuing an illegal alien in distress
• The area is situated between two Mexican metropolitan areas (b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

o To the west lies the City of Mexicali, the capital of Baja California with a
population of approximately 1.5 million

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1

 o The City of San Luis, Sonora lies to the east and has a population of over
140,000
• The eastern portion of this area is host to habitat for the Flat-Tailed Horned
Lizard, (b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

• Access to the area for other law enforcement agencies is restricted to the same
ingress routes previously mentioned. This affects their ability to respond to border
crimes, fire emergencies, and violence against illegal entrants in a timely manner.
Nature of the Threat:
• This area is operationally significant in that illegal cross border activity remains
constant with smuggling operations continually exploiting this area. This area
accounts for approximately 10.6% of total entries and 12.5% of the vehicle
incursions at the Calexico Border Patrol Station.
• Due to the deployment of camera systems in B5-A, detection of illegal cross
border traffic is adequate.
• This area has no primary or vehicle fence to impede or deter illegal cross border
violators traveling by vehicle or foot.
• The close proximity of Interstate 8 and Highway 98 allows illegal cross border
traffic to rapidly cross the border, get into a vehicle and be taken away from the
immediate border area.
• This area has a minimal tolerance to depth of intrusion because of the relatively
short time, 5-10 minutes, to transit from the border to Highway 98 or Interstate 8.
o Due to access issues, both foot and vehicle cross border violators are able
to exploit the area despite the significant network of remote video
surveillance systems and patrol efforts.
(b) (7)(E)
Formatted: Highlight

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

o The current deployment provides an “Effective Control” border security

status in this project area. This status is accomplished with the use of
cameras and current agent resources. The “Effective Control” status is
entirely dependent upon the current level of activity within this area and
will rapidly decrease if the level of illegal cross border activity level rises.
The level is determined with current levels of illegal cross-border activity,
but could not be maintained if those levels significantly increased without
enhanced technology, manpower and tactical infrastructure deployments
that create a persistent impedance.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 2

• Sensors – Sensors provide detection capabilities and limited tracking capabilities.
(b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

(b) (7)(E)

o Estimated cost - $5,148,500

o Estimated maintenance cost - $1,544,550
o Total cost - $6,693,050
• Cameras – Cameras allow agents to detect, identify, and classify threats. (b) Formatted: Highlight
(7)
(E)

(b) (7)(E)

o (b) (7)(E)
camera installation) - $24,000,000
o Cost estimate for camera maintenance - $7,200,000
o Total cost – $31,200,000
• Mobile Surveillance Systems (Radar) –These systems could provide detection,
identification, and classification capabilities.(b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

(b) (7)(E)
o Cost Estimate for MSS units only (not including necessary road
construction costs) - $1,962,000
o Estimated maintenance cost - $588,600
o Total cost – $2,550,600
• Border Patrol Agents – Border Patrol Agents are capable of detecting illegal
cross border entrants, can visually identify and classify threats, can respond to
intrusions, and bring the situation to an appropriate law enforcement resolution.
During hours of adverse weather and darkness this ability can be less effective.
Agents can be rapidly overwhelmed by large numbers of illegal cross border
entrants.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 3

 o The relatively flat terrain in this segment would aid agents if they were
utilized as a primary means of immediate border control. The
environmental impact of agents constantly patrolling the area would result
in increased usage and overall degradation of the area. The persistent
impedance factor is high as agents would be immediately available to
respond to all threats. This would create a favorable time-distance ratio
and enable agents to apprehend illegal cross border violators once they are
detected.
(b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

(b) (7)(E)
• Cost is $150,000 per agent (to include salary, benefits and
equipment)
• Total cost of agent only alternative over 3 years - $1,235,700,000
• Pedestrian Fence – Pedestrian fencing acts as a deterrent and improves the time-
distance ratio. 19.5 miles of pedestrian fence will significantly deter illegal
entrants who are not physically capable of climbing the structure and delay those
who are within this identified area. Operational data gleaned from similar areas in
El Centro Sector where primary pedestrian fence has been deployed has shown
there is an improved time-distance ratio that aids in apprehension capability.
o Primary pedestrian fencing was completed along a similar 7.38 mile
stretch of border on the west side of Calexico, California
• Illegal entries have dropped by 38% in the area this fence was
erected
o A favorable time-distance ratio created in this area will greatly improve
the persistent impedance factor of detecting illegal cross border activity
and foster an appropriate law enforcement resolution. This option will
address both foot and vehicular threats and alleviate the short time-
distance operational limitation by slowing down cross border violators and
extending the time frame.
• Bollard design (PV-1) built to accommodate anti-climb, vehicle
stop capability and 18’ height requirements
• Estimated cost to commercially construct pedestrian fencing - $4.8
million per mile
• Total estimated cost to construct pedestrian fencing - $93,600,000
• Estimated maintenance cost - $28,080,000
• The pedestrian fence will, with existing camera coverage, provide
a link in the correct mix of technology and personnel for this area
• Vehicle Fence – Vehicle fence acts as a deterrent and impedance to illegal
vehicle incursions. 19.5 miles of vehicle fence will assist in mitigating illegal
cross border entries via vehicle in this area. Vehicle entries are a significant threat
and may become more of a threat as adjacent areas are brought under effective
control.
o This option is only effective in addressing illegal vehicle entries. It is not
effective in regards to foot entries. Overall it only addresses the vehicle

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 4

 entry component of the persistent impedance factor. It does not improve
the time-distance ratio for entries by foot.
• Estimated cost to construct vehicle fence is $2,200,000 per mile
• Total estimated cost to construct vehicle fence - $42,900,000
• Estimated maintenance cost - $12,870,000
• Best Technology Combination – An analysis of technology components was
conducted to determine what combination of technology would be most effective.
Based on recommendations from Field Commanders and the Sector Chief, the
most effective mix for the B5-A segment was determined to be a combination of
sensors and MSS. This mix would enhance detection and tracking capabilities,
however it does not meet the persistent impedance requirement.
Key Evaluation Factors:
(b) (7)(E)
Formatted: Highlight

• The fiscal cost of such a deployment over three years is estimated at

$1,235,520,000
• The operational cost of the total number of agents deployed to gain and maintain
control of this area precludes any significant deployment of agents to address
shifts in smuggling activity to the western flanks.
• The installation of the technology, as a stand alone alternative, would not provide
the required the persistent impedance factor or enhance agent time-distance
response.
Recommended Solution:
• Pedestrian fencing is the recommended option for B5-A. Pedestrian fence will
create persistent impedance. It will deter illegal entrants and enhance the time-
distance ratio. It will augment the camera system already in place and protect
against both illegal vehicle and foot traffic. Pedestrian fencing will significantly
deter those not physically fit from crossing and create an operationally favorable
time-distance ratio.
• Integrate cameras, sensors, and MSS with laser pointer technology to provide
identification and tracking capabilities to agents in the field. This will compliment
pedestrian fence and enhance the time-distance ratio by providing early detection
capabilities.
• Deploy stadium type lighting in the border area to further increase detection and
deterrence capabilities during hours of darkness. Lighting, when combined with
other tactical infrastructure, creates a safer working environment and creates a
deterrence factor that optimizes operational effectiveness.
Projected Results:

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 5

• Illegal entries by foot will decrease resulting in a reduced impact on the
environment.
• A high degree of operational effectiveness and control along the immediate
border will be established as the added tactical infrastructure will afford agents
the ability to identify, confront, intercept and deter illegal entrants augmenting the
persistent impedance factor.
• Long term effect will require the deployment of fewer agents to maintain effective
control.
• The reduction in required manpower in this area will allow for the tactical
redeployment of agent assets to other areas of operation to more effectively
address any possible shift in smuggling patterns.
• This enhancement is expected to significantly raise the border security status of
this segment to a sustainable level of effective control.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 6