Tucson Sector (F-1)

Westside of Douglas, AZ
Deployment Analysis

Location: Douglas, Arizona .97 mile of rural terrain.

Key Issues/Constraints:
• The proposed F-1 project covers .97 miles of land border with Mexico in the
Douglas Border Patrol Station Area of Responsibility (AOR). The city of
Douglas, Arizona has a population of 13,000 people. The city of Agua Prieta,
Sonora, Mexico has a population of 130,000 people. (b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

• Highway 80 parallels the border from within ¾ mile to 1 mile of the F-1 segment.
Highway 80 is main roadway that travels to Highway 191 and then to Interstate
10. Interstate 10 is a major route to Tucson and Phoenix, Arizona. (b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

• Approximately 1 mile north of the border in the F-1 segment there is a land
developer preparing to build a residential subdivision of approximately 1000
homes. There are currently 8 houses in this area.
• Douglas, Arizona has many transportation systems that travel to Tucson and
Phoenix daily. (b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

• F-1 is the only section remaining within proximity of the Douglas urban area to
not have a pedestrian fence structure. For approximately 25 miles west of F-1
there is continuous pedestrian fence 15 feet in height. For approximately 10 miles
east of the F-1 segment there is continuous pedestrian fence 15 feet in height.
• The F-1 segment includes measures for proper drainage of rain water. The
current condition of this area is poor and contains several wash-outs from water
shed. After the annual rainfall, the existing border road needs continuous repair.
The proposed fence construction includes drainage solution and road stabilization
to assist in the prevention of road erosion.

Nature of the Threat:

• Daily activity in the .97 mile segment averages 24 detected entries per day and 15
arrests per day.
• There have been 13 detected vehicle drive thrus in the F-1 segment.
• There has been 1 reported assault on a Border Patrol Agent in the F-1 segment.
• Thick vegetation provides concealment for traffic and the ability to hide from the
cameras, radar, and other detection efforts. Once the entry is detected, the time is

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 1

 crucial for agents to intercept the traffic. (b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

• Traffic patterns angle back to the east into the city limits of Douglas. (b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

• The F-1 segment is the only section of the Douglas urban AOR to not have
pedestrian fence. This segment in it’s current condition is appealing to traffic
with the absence of any impedance on the border. Vehicle drive thru traffic also
presents a danger to the residential community within the F-1 segment.

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

o The current deployment provides “Initial Control Capabilities

Established” border security status in the project area.

• Sensors – Deployment of sensors on active trails will give detection and limited
tracking.
o Time-Distance will be a factor with sensor deployment due to the close
proximity to a major highway, thick vegetation, and houses through the F-
1 segment.
o Although sensors detect traffic (b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

(b) (7)(E)

o The total 3 year cost (including maintenance) is – $333,840

o The Sector Chief Patrol Agent anticipates the deployment of sensors
combined with the current deployment baseline will facilitate increased
detection capabilities but will not significantly enhance identification,
classification or response time requirements.

• Cameras – Cameras will provide the initial visual detection of persons and
vehicles entering the United States.
(b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 2

 o (b) (7)(E)
camera installation) – $10,880,000
o The Sector Chief Patrol Agent anticipates the deployment of cameras
combined with the current deployment baseline will facilitate increased
identification, classification, tracking and detection capabilities but will
not significantly enhance deterrence or response requirements that the
pedestrian fence alternative provides.

• Mobile Surveillance Systems (Radar) – Mobile Surveillance Systems (MSS)

(b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

can detect activity at long distances.

(b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

o The 3 year cost estimate for MSS units only (not including any road
construction or improvement costs) – $1,700,400
o The Sector Chief Patrol Agent anticipates the deployment of MSS units
combined with the current deployment baseline will facilitate increased
identification, classification, tracking and detection capabilities but will
not significantly enhance deterrence or response requirements that the
pedestrian fence alternative provides.

• Border Patrol Agents – Border Patrol Agents are capable of detecting entries,
identifying and classifying the threat, and responding to intrusions.
(b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

(b) (7)(E)
o Cost is $150,000 per agent (to include salary, benefits and equipment)
o Total cost of agent only alternative over 3 years – $61,650,000
o The Sector Chief Patrol Agent anticipates the deployment (b) (7)(E) Formatted: Highlight

is deficient in the areas of executability and sustainability when

compared to the pedestrian fence alternative.

• Pedestrian Fence – .97 miles of pedestrian fence will deter illegal entrants who
are not physically capable of climbing the structure and significantly delay those
who may be fit enough to climb it.
o Bollard design pedestrian fence built to accommodate anti-climb, vehicle
stop capability and up to 18’ height requirement.
o The 3 year cost to construct and maintain fencing, access roads, and
associated drainage installation – $13,159,731
o As a stand alone feature, pedestrian fence cannot detect illegal entrants or
alert enforcement personnel for a proper response and resolution to the

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 3

 situation. As a result, personnel and technology are required to
compliment tactical infrastructure such as fence.
o Proposed access roads and fencing will enhance operations by increasing
agent mobility and enabling them to tactically address the high volume of
pedestrian traffic in the area. Tucson Sector has requested a fence design
that meets both pedestrian and vehicle stop capability requirements for the
F-1 segment.
o The Sector Chief Patrol Agent anticipates the deployment of pedestrian
fencing and supporting road infrastructure combined with the current
baseline deployment will enhance detection, identification, classification,
and response requirements. In addition, the pedestrian fence provides the
necessary persistence impedance requirement that facilitates long term
sustainability.

• Vehicle Fence – 0.97 miles of vehicle fence as a stand alone solution will curtail
and deter vehicle traffic.
o The high level of foot traffic can quickly defeat the vehicle fence.
o Estimated cost to construct vehicle fence is $2.2 million per mile not
including necessary road and drainage structures.
o The total 3 year cost to construct and maintain vehicle fence – $2,774,200
o The Sector Chief Patrol Agent anticipates that the deployment of the
vehicle fence combined with the current deployment baseline will not
significantly enhance detection, identification, classification and response
requirements.

• Best Technology Combination – An analysis of technology components was

conducted to determine what complement of technology would be most cost
effective. Based on the analysis conducted by Field Commanders and the Sector
Chief, the most cost effective combination of technology mix for the F-1 segment
was determined to be the cameras and sensors. This alternative provides
enhanced detection, identification and classification capabilities but does not
address response or persistence of impedance requirements.

Key Evaluation Factors:

Douglas station would need to deploy approximately 34 agents per shift to attempt to
prevent successful incursions in the .97 mile segment of the proposed pedestrian fence
footprint. In order to adequately provide the same level of deterrence as the fence, agents
would need to be strategically placed every 50 yards each shift.
• The 3 year cost of such a deployment is approximately $61,459,200.
• In comparison, the 3 year cost for pedestrian fence is $13,159,731.
• The installation of the technology, as a stand alone alternative, would not provide
the required level of deterrence or enhance agent time-distance response.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 4

Recommended Solution:
• Deploy pedestrian fencing that includes a vehicle barrier component to deter and
to significantly impede those who are attempting to cross into the United States
illegally.
• Compliment the pedestrian fence with technology and necessary access roads.
o Deploy a sensor system on the fence to alert agents when illegal entrants
are attempting to climb or tamper with the fence.
o Build access roads and improve the patrol roads to facilitate fence
construction and upgrade patrol activities.
o Deploy cameras providing overlapping view sheds of the fence to provide
enhanced surveillance and compliment detection capabilities.
o 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 US.
• Deploy agents on the border in a mobile capacity.
o Agents’ presence on the border is a deterrent and required for response.
o Complimenting the baseline agents with pedestrian fence, access roads,
and detection technology is the best solution.

Projected Results:
• Illegal entries will decrease and the crime that accompanies the smuggling
activity will decrease as well. Criminal activity from bandits and others that
result from narcotics and human smuggling include kidnapping, robbery, murder,
rape, extortion, and robbery. The result of decreased criminal activity is a better
quality of life to the communities.
• The pedestrian fence will increase the level of difficulty for entry by the criminal
organizations, illegal entrants, and vehicle drive thru traffic.
• Agents will be available to expand operations to other areas in order to address
the possible shift in smuggling patterns.
• The improved border road and stabilization of this segment will minimize the
resources used annually to maintain the access of the area and improve the patrol
and response abilities of the Douglas Station.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 5