From: (b) (6)

To: (b) (6)

Cc: (b) (6)
Subject: Re: VF-2A vs. VF-2B
Date: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:31:45 PM

Thanks for the response. We will ensure your comments regarding landowner concerns are noted.
(b)
(6)
----- Original Message -----
From: (b) (6)
To: (b) (6)
Cc:(b) (6) R
Sent: Mon Mar 17 17:28:13 2008
Subject: RE: VF-2A vs. VF-2B

(b) (6)

In regards to the Normandy style vehicle fence, VF-2A will be the style of Normandy fencing that will
be used for the Lordsburg Station. I understand through El Paso Sector that all of the stations in New
Mexico will be uniform in style of fencing. Although this type of vehicle fence option is the style that
has been determined to be used for all stations in New Mexico, we will have land owners and ranchers
in our area of operation that will oppose this style. These land owners and ranchers would strongly
prefer the rail and post style fence for several reasons, which have previously been expressed.

Thanks,

(b)
(6)

Supervisory Border Patrol Agent

SBI / Lordsburg Station / El Paso Sector

DHS / CBP / OBP

(b) (6)

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 12:15 PM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: (b) (6)
Subject: RE: VF-2A vs. VF-2B

(b) (6) ,

The issue of Normandy versus Post-on-Rail vehicle fencing in your AOR has been discussed via channels
through the El Paso Sector. EPT TI personnel have authorized the change to Normandy due to the lack
of need/probability to retro-fit the vehicle fencing to pedestrian fencing in the near future. The costs
differentials are high and if there is not an operational or agent safety factor we cannot justify the post
on rail in that area.

All that being said, we are requesting the Lordsburg Station’s input of this highly probable operational
impact issue of SBI TI not using the narrower width Normandy Style vehicle fence to accommodate the
narrow roads in your AOR. (See (b) (6) email below) Please respond promptly to this fast
moving issue as we have to represent your concerns here in D.C. Thanks.

(b)
(6)

Assistant Chief

Headquarters Border Patrol

((b) (6)

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 1:30 PM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: VF-2A vs. VF-2B

FYI sirs.

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 10:35 AM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: RE: VF-2A vs. VF-2B

(b) (6)
Lordsburg Station has not requested any type of Normandy Style fence (VF-A or VF-2B). We are
requesting VF-1 fencing only.

Later,

(b)
(6)

Supervisory Border Patrol Agent

SBI / Lordsburg Station / El Paso Sector

DHS / CBP / OBP

(b) (6)

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 7:20 AM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: (b) (6)

Subject: VF-2A vs. VF-2B

Good Morning (b)

(6)

The request for deploying VF-2B in your AOR (specifically HV-1 through HV-4) is in question. Please
respond to the following concerning your request.

* If your request was based on a road concern, please describe your concerns in detain.

* Address current road conditions (jeep trail, dragged road, or if they are good roads passable
with heavy equipment).
* Whether the deployment areas already have a complete AE and the width of the area that
was surveyed or is being currently being surveyed.
 * If the border road is to be upgraded to an all-weather patrol road in the future (near or long
term plans).

(b) he cost is significant; give us as much justification as you can, so we can fight a good battle for
(6)
what you need in Lordsburg. If the roads are not the issue for requesting the VF-2B, please give us as
much background as you can on why you need the VF-2B.

Thanks for your quick attention in this matter.

Call if you have any questions.

(b) (6)

Supervisory Border Patrol Agent

(b) (6)
3300 J Street
Deming, New Mexico 88030
(b) (6)
Deming Station: "Laying the tracks so that others may follow."