OBP006172

PF225 K-2B/C Segment

El Paso Sector

January 22, 2007

SBI
SBI
For Official Use Only
OBP006173

Scope of Work

•Construct pedestrian fence (PV-2 post and rail with mesh) between
Socorro head gates to 1 mile west of Fabens POE
•~ 19.8 miles of fencing
– PF will connect to proposed PF225 segments on the west (K-2A) and east
(K-3)
•Intent is to build the entire segment on IBWC property but property
boundary questions exist
•El Paso Water District #1 is requesting a number of modifications to their
facilities due to adverse effects they believe the fence will have on them:
– Reconstruction and lining of ~8 Miles of their riverside irrigation water canal
– Piping of several miles of a drainage ditch
– Relocation and automation of 3 sets of wasteway gate valves
– District is also requesting $14K to cover their administrative costs associated
with PF225
•Design-Bid-Build execution approach to be utilized

For Official Use Only 2

OBP006174

Scope of Work

Rio Grande River

IBWC Levee District’s Primary Irrigation

Canal

District’s Canal Access

Road

For Official Use Only 3

OBP006175

Scope of Work
Irrigation Canal
District Requires
that the District
Access to Sluice Gates
would like to be
from IBWC levee
Reconstructed

District/USBP would like

floodgates to be relocated
& automated
(1 of 3 sets)

Gates on the left requested to be

automated & relocated to outfall on
the right

For Official Use Only 4

OBP006176

Alignment Alternatives Considered for Area

Adjacent to Riverside Canal

•Alternative 1-Install floating fence (P-3A-15) on south side of crest of levee

– Would require widening/placement of fill in the Rio Grande floodway & Mexico approval
– USBP opposes placement of fence on south side of levee from an operational perspective
– IBWC opposes placement of fill in the Rio Grande floodway-Would require Mexican approval
– No cost estimate
•Alternative 2-Reconstruct District’s riverside canal (reduce width from ~80 ft to ~50 ft and line with an impermeable barrier) and install
floating fence (P-3A-15) on north side of widened crest of levee
– USBP OK
– IBWC OK but prefers fence off of levee
– District OK
– Estimated cost $10.75M-$11.75M + $600K to relocate and automate flood gate valves
•Alternative 3-Alternative 2 but install fence (PV-2) on north toe of levee
– USBP OK
– IBWC KO
– District OK
– Estimated cost $11M-$12M per mile + $600K to relocate and automate flood gate valves
•Alternative 4-Install retaining wall/fence along southern embankment of IBWC levee (i.e. similar to Hidalgo County proposal)
– USBP opposes from an operational perspective
– IBWC KO
– Would not impact District
– Estimated cost $5.5M-$7M
•Alternative 5-Install fence (PV-2) on north toe of IBWC levee with mow strips along both sides of fence
– USBP OK
– IBWC OK w/ mow strips
– District does not support due to maintenance and accessibility concerns relative to the canal
– Estimated cost $11M-$12M + $600K to relocate and automate flood gate valves
•Alternative 6-Install fence (PV-2) on north side of District’s canal access road
– USBP opposes due to road maintenance concerns & reduced operational effectiveness
– Does not impact IBWC
– District opposes and says land will need to be condemned
– Estimated cost $3.75M-$4.25M

For Official Use Only 5

OBP006177

Alternatives #1 - #3

Note: Alternatives #1 & #2 would use P-3A-

15 style fence (floating) and Alt #3 would us
PV-2

For Official Use Only 6

OBP006178

Alternative #4

For Official Use Only 7

OBP006179

Alternative 5 – Concrete Mow Strips

(b) (7)(E)

For Official Use Only 8

OBP006180

Alternative #6

For Official Use Only 9

OBP006181

Real Estate

•The location of the property boundary

separating IBWC and District land is in
question
– Bureau of Reclamation operated the canal
until 1996 when the District assumed O&M
responsibilities
– IBWC believes their property extends to the
northern toe of the levee
– District is vague on it’s understanding of the
property boundary location
• Has stated it is a moot point because fence
impacts to their facilities is the same
regardless of property ownership
– According to the Corps, existing property
boundary information is poor
• At this time, the Corps cannot render an
opinion on the property boundary location
•Alternatives #1 & #4 are located on IBWC
property (not District impacts)
•Alternatives #2, #3 & #5 are most likely
located on both IBWC & District property
•Alternative #6 is located on District property

For Official Use Only 10

OBP006182

Environmental Status

•The EA for the segment (as well as K-2A thru K-5) is on-hold awaiting
resolution of the fence alignment and associated scope of work
– Draft EA is currently ~ 4 weeks behind schedule
•No significant environmental issues are known relative to Alternatives #1-
#5 (site surveys are essentially complete)
•Possible cultural resource sites exist for Alternative #6 (no site surveys
have been completed)

For Official Use Only 11

OBP006183

El Paso Water District No. 1

•Five member elected Board of Directors govern the Irrigation District

•Jesus “Chuy” Reyes is the appointed General Manager
– Brother of Congressman Reyes
•Al Blair is the District Engineer
– Principal with Axiom-Blair Engineering
– Also the District Engineer for Hudspeth County (K-4 and K-5)

For Official Use Only 12

OBP006184

Recommended Next Steps

•Discuss alternatives with USBP/OBP and develop consensus on fence

location
•USBP/SBI senior leadership contact El Paso Water District and
discuss/agree to proposed action
•Revise baseline schedule (if necessary)
•Complete Environmental Assessment
– Obtain ROE-S&E from Water District if Alternative #6 is selected
• Will likely require DT
•Begin preparation of RFP

For Official Use Only 13

OBP006185

Back-up Slides

For Official Use Only 14

OBP006186

Alternatives #3 & #5
Proposed fence location for
Alternative #5
Existing riverside canal cross-
section

District’s proposed riverside

canal cross-section

Proposed fence location for

Alternative #3

For Official Use Only 15