Interpretive dance for proposals?
Border-wall queries range from serious to sarcastic
The border wall may not be built yet, but it’s sparked a great deal of curious questions.
The USA TODAY NETWORK obtained almost 200 pages of emails sent to Customs and Border Protection about building the US.-Mexico border wall, a central part of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.
In August, six companies were selected to build border-wall prototypes up to 30 feet tall in San Diego. During the time that companies could submit their proposals for building the prototypes, CBP received hundreds of questions from interested businesses.
Some of the questions — asked seriously or sarcastically — showcase the wide range of emails the government received. Here are a few of them.
One person asked CBP if the government would consider “branding” the wall on either side with slogans such as, “This wall does not represent the views or beliefs of the American people.”
Other suggestions for branding were “This wall was the order of an administration that did not receive the popular vote and therefore goes against the sentiment of the American people” and “Murals on one or both sides of the wall that demonstrate tolerance or basic human decency.”
CBP did not appear to send a reply. A question came from someone “inquiring on behalf of my boss from China, he is very interested in assisting President Donald Trump in his work with the Mexican border wall.”
The emailer wanted to know what the next steps were for getting involved in the border-wall project.
“(T)his is our first time attempting to assist a major US project,” the email continues. “We are highly experienced in the management of multi-billion dollar companies in China, and we feel that we are more than adequate for the execution of this job.”
At least one Mexican company also said it was interested in submitting a proposal to build prototypes. All of the six companies chosen in the end were American.
An interested business sent in an email with a question marked “technical” about oral presentations that a select group of finalists would give in Washington, D.C.
“Question: Can interpretive dance be incorporated into the oral presentations sections 3 or 4?”
Other questions the emailer submitted seemed serious, including a question on making their proposal cost effective.
Someone emailed CBP to get more details on a specific kind of security threat — explosives.
“Do the types of physical breach attempts include drilling a small hole (<2”) and inserting C-4 or similar military grade explosive?” they asked.
CBP had an answer for that: “Offerors are encouraged to come up with designs that will mitigate physical breach by any means. That said, see Threshold requirements of C.3.1.”
The government’s requests for proposals included all sorts of ways the walls had to withstand attack: “The wall shall prevent/deter for a minimum of 30 minutes the creation a physical breach of the wall (e.g., punching through the wall) larger than 12-inches in diameter or square using sledgehammer, car jack, pick axe, chisel, battery operated impact tools, battery operated cutting tools, Oxy/ acetylene torch or other similar handheld tools.”
The government’s requests said companies are responsible for their own security in the event of a “hostile attack” during the construction process, a point that generated some questions from potential contractors.
In the words of one emailer: “Will the government allow for Contractors to be fully armed in State/Local jurisdictions that have strict gun control laws? Will the Government provide legal indemnifications for the use of deadly force in such situations?”
The government’s response to both of these questions:
“No.”
An enthusiastic emailer sent in a long list of ideas about the wall. It starts with some words of confidence: “I really want a successful border barrier project.”
The email then goes into paragraphs of detail about the design of the wall.
“The location of the wall is more important than what the wall is made out of... If the area on BOTH sides of the wall are controlled, a chain link fence usually works fine. The most secure prisons in the world only use chain link fences...”
“The Great Wall of China is a great example of always building along ridge tops to give defenders the advantage and attackers the disadvantage...”
“Fast transportation along the wall is critical. Responses to intrusions must be quick and 24-7 available...”
“Sensors and utilities are critical. Detection is critical to enable response and apprehension before they touch our big, beautiful wall...”
The government made it clear in its requests that it wasn’t looking for advice — this was only for companies to submit their prototype proposals. But it set up a separate “request for information” for people like this emailer, who have ideas for how to manage the wall project in the long term.