From: To: Subject: Date

:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY ( Re: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 7:16:26 AM

Call me! ----- Original Message ----From:(b) (6) To: SELF, JEFFREY D Sent: Tue Apr 17 15:01:38 2007 Subject: Jeff,

The FEIT tele-conference (Army Corps real estate) brought up the question of “What rights will landowners retain with fencing issues such as (fence off of the border and access to water and the area behind the fence). I brought up the fact that it is a case by case issue and that the individual sectors have the power to work with the (private or public) landowners to find the appropriate accommodations for the specific problem (e.g. cattleguards, gates in the fencing). They immediately said they couldn’t continue without a “blanket” requirement by OBP stating what access the landowners will have.

I would like to respond to them that OBP requires that the real estate personnel consult with the individual sectors and the landowners to work out the specific requirements for any areas of question. As for the areas that do not have “special needs” then the standard easement application will apply.

Am I incorrect in my thinking that there is not a way to “blanket” identify what access all landowners will have in regards to the fence? Is there a historical statement of access in regards to boundary fences and landowners?

Please advise on your thoughts or concerns.

(b) (6)

Assistant Chief OPA Division Office of Border Patrol 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 6.5E Washington, D.C. 20229

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY ( Re: "Murder Board" with Chief Colburn this Thursday at 4:00 pm Wednesday, May 09, 2007 11:46:33 AM

(b) (6) We're about done with the message. If you have time can you get with (b) (6) and (b) (6) they can give you a copy. Give us your opinion on how we're doing if you have time.
Yes, (b) (6) Jeff should be involved.

----- Original Message ----From: (b) (6) To: SELF, JEFFREY D Sent: Wed May 09 10:39:01 2007 Subject: FW: "Murder Board" with Chief Colburn this Thursday at 4:00 pm Hi Jeff How are the key messages going? We will need to be in a position to brief Chief Colburn tomorrow afternoon. Are there additional materials/message that would be helpful to have? Should (b) (6) be part of this?

(b) (6) Department of Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection Special Advisor to the Commissioner (b) (6)

-----Original Message----From: (b) (6) Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 10:27 AM To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; COLBURN, RONALD S; SELF, JEFFREY D; (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) VITIELLO, RONALD D; (b) (6) Subject: "Murder Board" with Chief Colburn this Thursday at 4:00 pm Importance: High Folks In order to assist Chief Colburn with his participation in Senator Cornyn's "Town Hall Meeting," we have scheduled a "murder board" for this Thursday at 4:00 pm for one hour (location will be the Commissioner's large conference room, 4.3A) Please let me know your availability to attend and feel free to forward to any/all parties who would be in a position to assist with this endeavor. I will be reaching out to many of you (off line) as we begin to develop materials to assist Chief Colburn

Thanks in advance,

(b) (6) Department of Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection Special Advisor to the Commissioner (b) (6)
-----Original Message----From: SELF, JEFFREY D Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 10:11 AM To: (b) (6) ; GIDDENS, GREGORY; (b) (6) COLBURN, RONALD S Cc: (b) (6) VITIELLO, RONALD D;(b) (6) Subject: Re: planning for Saturday's town hall meeting in Brownsville, Texas

(b) (6) I agree, when and where?
Jeff ----- Original Message ----From: (b) (6) To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; (b) (6) COLBURN, RONALD S; SELF, JEFFREY D Cc: (b) (6) VITIELLO, RONALD D; (b) (6) Sent: Tue May 08 20:35:47 2007 Subject: Re: planning for Saturday's town hall meeting in Brownsville, Texas To clear up confusion...when I said (b) or myslef and(b) (6) would be there...it was in reference to (6) the pre-brief. I wasn't committing anyone to Brownsville. ----- Original Message ----From: GIDDENS, GREGORY To: (b) (6) COLBURN, RONALD S; SELF, JEFFREY D Cc: (b) (6) VITIELLO, RONALD D; (b) (6) Sent: Tue May 08 19:08:13 2007 Subject: Re: planning for Saturday's town hall meeting in Brownsville, Texas We need to ensure Ron has all the lastest nuances on the fence issue.... Greg G ----- Original Message ----From: (b) (6) To: (b) (6) COLBURN, RONALD S; SELF, JEFFREY D Cc: (b) (6) VITIELLO, RONALD D; (b) (6) GIDDENS, GREGORY Sent: Tue May 08 19:04:36 2007 Subject: planning for Saturday's town hall meeting in Brownsville, Texas Hello folks:

OK, I have had a couple of conversations with (b) (6) in Senator Cornyn's office (she is the main coordinator of the upcoming town hall meeting). Here is an update with respect to this Saturday's event with the Senator and Chief Colburn in Brownsville: -- Entire event will be "open press" -- At 12:45 pm, Chief Colburn arrives along with the county judge, judge pro-tem, and county administrator -- At 12:55 pm, the Senator arrives and has a "meet and greet" with Chief Colburn and the judges/administrator -- 1:00 pm: Town hall meeting begins -- Senator: 10 -- 15 minutes of remarks -- Chief Colburn: 10 --15 minutes of remarks -- Open forum for questions and answers. Some of the questions that will likely come up are: -- Seized land/eminent domain -- Long delays at the POEs. Concern of some local citizens that CBP's border security efforts will further slow down the flow of legitimate trade and travel -- The cane issue --At least one attendee is one of the "big property owners who is very upset" -- The event will conclude with 15 minutes of "press availability" Given the importance of this event, and the risks and rewards associated with it, I highly recommend that we come together on Thursday for a "murder board" to ensure that CBP/OBP message, as delivered by Chief Colburn, is on course. Thoughts?

(b) (6) Department of Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection Special Advisor to the Commissioner (b) (6)

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6)

ADAMS, ROWDY ( Re: REVISED: [URGENT] S1BB - 10.16.07 - Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue Monday, October 15, 2007 7:41:10 PM

Thanks boss! ----- Original Message ----From: ADAMS, ROWDY D To: (b) (6) Sent: Mon Oct 15 19:39:45 2007 Subject: RE: REVISED: [URGENT] S1BB - 10.16.07 - Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue Thanks

(b) I got the items signed that you wanted.....in my out basket... (6) -----Original Message----From: (b) (6) Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 7:39 PM To: ADAMS, ROWDY D Subject: Fw: REVISED: [URGENT] S1BB - 10.16.07 - Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue
Hey Rowdy, Per your request. Have a good night! ----- Original Message ----From: (b) (6) To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6)

FLOSSMAN, LOREN W; (b) (6)

Sent: Mon Oct 15 16:08:21 2007 Subject: RE: REVISED: [URGENT] S1BB - 10.16.07 - Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue

(b)(5), (b)(6)

(b) (6)
Business Manager, Operations SBI - Fence Program (PF225, VF300) U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(b) (6)

________________________________

From:(b) (6) Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 3:23 PM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6)

FLOSSMAN, LOREN W; (b) (6)

Subject: RE: REVISED: [URGENT] S1BB - 10.16.07 - Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue

(b) (5)

(b) (6)
h

(b) (6)

Associate Chief Counsel, Trade and Finance U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(b) (6)

ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT/PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION -- CIRCULATION RESTRICTED

THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT AND/OR PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY/CLIENT COMMUNICATIONS. IT IS THEREFORE NOT AVAILABLE FOR RELEASE, DISCLOSURE, OR USE OUTSIDE OF THE AGENCY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE COMMISSIONER AND THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COUNSEL, (b) (6) ________________________________ From: (b) (6) Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 2:43 PM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) FLOSSMAN, LOREN W; (b) (6) Subject: FW: REVISED: [URGENT] S1BB - 10.16.07 - Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue Importance: High

(b) (6)

(b)(5),(b)(6)

Thank you,

(b) (6)
Business Manager, Operations SBI - Fence Program (PF225, VF300) U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(b) (6)

________________________________ From: (b) (6) ECSEC Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 12:49 PM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: FW: REVISED: [URGENT] S1BB - 10.16.07 - Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue Importance: High

Hey (b) (6) ,

See additional info from the Commissioner’s office.

Thanks,

(b) (6)

________________________________ From: (b) (6) Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 12:14 PM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: REVISED: [URGENT] S1BB - 10.16.07 - Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue Importance: High

FYI - see below and attached. Adding OCC as required coordination.

(b)(5),(b)(6)

------------------------------------------------

(b) (6)
on behalf of CBPtasking Office of the Commissioner U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(b) (6)

________________________________ From: (b) (6) Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 11:54 AM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: REVISED: [URGENT] S1BB - 10.16.07 - Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue Importance: High Tasker Name Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue Lead Office(s) SBI Required Coordination OCC Product Briefing memo and background Notes Please see below for details

Due to CBP Tasking ASAP, NLT 3:00 p.m. today, October 15, 2007

Required Coordinators - Please provide input to the lead office as soon as possible.

Tasker information, contact lists, and templates can be found online at (b) (2) . Please ensure that your response adheres to the guidelines set forth in the CBP Style Book, which can be found at (b) (2) . All responses should be . Please do not submitted directly to (b) (2) modify subject lines as we use them for tracking purposes.

------------------------------------------------

(b) (6)
on behalf of CBPtasking Office of the Commissioner U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(b) (6)

________________________________ From: (b) (6) Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 9:58 AM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: [URGENT] S1BB - 10.16.07 - Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue - (Due: 10.15.07, 1500) Importance: High

Please provide updated materials for tomorrow’s meeting – will need background on briefing memo. SECRETARY BRIEFING BOOK TASKING Event Date

Tuesday, 10.16.07 (1100-1115) Event Name Follow up on San Pedro Fence Issue Lead Component CBP Required Coordination OGC Product Briefing Memo, Background Notes Attendees: S1 S2 COS/DCOS

(b) (6)

Jay Ahern Greg Giddens

(b) (6)

Location: NAC, Secretary’s Conference Room 5110 D

OGC Coordination: Please ensure that briefing materials have been fully coordinated with OGC staff working in your component.

Meeting Classification: Please include bullet in background section of briefing memorandum if the

meeting or any of the briefing materials are classified. (i.e., “This meeting [or any of the briefing materials] are classified”). Please note that all materials being shown to the Secretary must be passed through Exec Sec first. Please do not bring anything to the meeting ES has not seen (classified or unclassified) without prior approval. If a presentation is to be made, Lead Component is responsible for providing an appropriate number of handouts at the meeting. (15 if the meeting takes place in Rm. 5110 D; 25 if in Rm. 5107.)

Due Monday, 10.15.07 (1600)

DHS Briefing Book Standards and Procedures (including links to template and example) are located on . If you are having the DHS intranet at:(b) (2) trouble opening the link, please copy and paste the address into your Internet Explorer Browser. You may also hold the “CTRL” button down while clicking the link with your mouse.

When transmitting to BriefingStaffA and BriefingStaffB, please use the following format for the subject line of your email:

· S1BB – Date of Event (mm.dd.yy) – Description (1-2 words) (Recommended BriefingStaffB member which should review) [Example: “S1BB – 01.04.06 – FEMA (PPIA, Counselors)”]

·

Note: For Deputy Secretary briefing paper, please replace “S2” for “S1”.

Thank you,

(b) (6)
Secretary's Briefing Book Office of the Executive Secretariat Office of the Secretary U.S. Department of Homeland Security

(b) (6)

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)

FLOSSMAN, LOREN ( ; GIDDENS, GREGOR( ; (b)

(6)

; ADAMS, ROWDY D; (

RE: RESEND of Giddens" Email- MATERIAL FOR VEHICLE FENCE Friday, November 16, 2007 9:54:42 AM

Recommended approach was for Boeing to provide the supply contracts for PF225 (primarily for mesh & bollards) and for the Corps to provide the supply contracts for VF. Also recommend that Boeing be designated as an alternative source for VF. v/r (b) (6) From: (b) (6) Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 8:34 AM (b) (6) Cc: GIDDENS, GREGORY Subject: RESEND of Giddens' Email- MATERIAL FOR VEHICLE FENCE Importance: High AllI apologize if this is a duplication; original email drafted and send by Greg Giddens:

(b) (6)
I just found out that COE cannot buy materials for vehicle fence. We had planned, based on previous indication from COE that they could support it, to use COE as primary for pedestrian fence. Can you confirm that COE has now determined they cannot support material procurement for vehicle fence? I was planning on telling S1 at 1100 today that COE was supporting vehicle fence supply management.

(b) (6) (b) (6) Executive Assistant to Greg Giddens, Executive Director- Secure Border Initiative (b) (6)

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY ( RE: GSRC Pedestrain Fence on Organ Pipe Tuesday, May 15, 2007 9:44:09 AM

I would but I can't stomach the thought that you might come in every morning and kiss my picture. What stories? From: (b) (6) Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 1:11 PM To: SELF, JEFFREY D Subject: RE: GSRC Pedestrain Fence on Organ Pipe Sir, Could you please send me a 8X10 glossy of yourself and sign it “to my bestest buddy (b) (6) desk. In turn I agree not to tell any lay-in stories. Congrats for my

(b) (6)
From: SELF, JEFFREY D (b) (6) Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 1:33 PM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: RE: GSRC Pedestrain Fence on Organ Pipe Guys, I can't say this enough, manage the message! If you don't hear it from OBP or SBInet then tell whoever is saying what they shouldn't to pipe up. We have a wildfire in Texas because of this and we can't be fighting a two front battle. We need to reach out to our contractors and advise them to be careful as to what they say and to whom they say it. Jeffrey D. Self Division Chief Operational Planning and Analysis Office of Border Patrol (b) (6)

Adams, Rowdy D; (b) (6) ; SELF, JEFFREY D; (b) (6)

From: (b) (6) Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 11:48 AM To: (b) (6) L Cc: (b) (6) Subject: RE: GSRC Pedestrain Fence on Organ Pipe

Adams, Rowdy D; (b) (6) SELF, JEFFREY D; (b) (6)

(b) (6)

, Thanks for the information. We appreciate it.

( b
From: (b) (6) Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 6:20 AM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: RE: GSRC Pedestrain Fence on Organ Pipe

Adams, Rowdy D; (b) (6) ; SELF, JEFFREY D; (b) (6)

(b) et al, (6) We checked the P225 lay-down for Lukeville and determined that there was 2.1 mile east and 2.1 mile west of the POE proposed.
Thanks,

(b) (6) Acting Associate Chief Office of Border Patrol / Headquarters Facilities & Tactical Infrastructure Branch (b) (6)
From: (b) (6) Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 6:33 AM To: (b) (6) Adams, Rowdy D; (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: RE: GSRC Pedestrain Fence on Organ Pipe Good morning(b) (6) My understanding is that all fencing locations are based on Sector requests. I’ll forward this information to our PM on the fencing projects, who can answer exactly how much is going in at those sites.

(b) (6) Secure Border Initiative U.S. Customs and Border Protection (b) (6)
From: (b) (6) Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 7:25 PM To: Adams, Rowdy D; (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: RE: GSRC Pedestrain Fence on Organ Pipe

(b) , Do you have any information on this stretch of fencing? (b) (6) (6)
From: (b) (6) Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 3:57 PM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: FW: GSRC Pedestrain Fence on Organ Pipe

'

Importance: High

(b) (6)
Who is ultimately responsible for deciding the fencing locations? Is the fencing on the Organ Pipe a done deal? Thanks

(b) (6) Tucson Sector Assistant Chief Patrol Agent (b) (6)

From: (b) (6) Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 2:47 PM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: GSRC Pedestrain Fence on Organ Pipe Gents, I believe (b) called about the representative from GSRC who is onsite at the Ajo Station and is telling (6) us that we will probably be getting 29 miles of pedestrian fence along the OPCNM.

(b)(5), (b)(7)(E)

Thanks (b) (6)

From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

ADAMS, ROWDY ( RE: TRO for all projects in Arizona Monday, November 05, 2007 8:12:23 AM

Rowdy, expressions of undying affection aside, is there something that you want us to look at this a.m.? --(b) (6) -----Original Message----From: ADAMS, ROWDY D Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 7:12 PM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: Re: TRO for all projects in Arizona

(b) (5)
----- Original Message ----From: (b) (6) To: ADAMS, ROWDY D Cc: (b) (6) Sent: Sat Nov 03 17:13:43 2007 Subject: Fw: TRO for all projects in Arizona

(b) (5)
----- Original Message ----From: (b) (6) To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Sent: Sat Nov 03 16:42:36 2007 Subject: Fw: TRO for all projects in Arizona

(b) (6)

(b)(5),(b)(6)

Thanks, (b) (6) Office of Chief Counsel, CBP (b) (6) ----- Original Message ----From: ADAMS, ROWDY D To: (b) (6) <Jeffrey.Self(b) (6) FLOSSMAN, LOREN W; (b) (6)

Sent: Sat Nov 03 10:53:07 2007 Subject: Re: TRO for all projects in Arizona

(b)(5), (b)(6)

Rowdy ----- Original Message ----From: (b) (6) To: (b) (6) Self, Jeffrey D (b) (6) Adams, Rowdy D(b) (6) Sent: Sat Nov 03 10:44:18 2007 Subject: Fw: TRO for all projects in Arizona FYI ----- Original Message ----From: (b) (6) To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Sent: Fri Nov 02 18:57:44 2007 Subject: RE: TRO for all projects in Arizona Sir,

(b)(5),(b)(6)

Thanks

(b) (6) Tucson Sector Assistant Chief Patrol Agent (b) (6)

-----Original Message----From: (b) (6) Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 3:16 PM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: FW: TRO for all projects in Arizona Importance: High Sirs,

(b) (5)
Thanks

(b) (6) Tucson Sector Assistant Chief Patrol Agent (b) (6)
-----Original Message-----

From: (b) (6) Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 2:00 PM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: FW: TRO for all projects in Arizona

l]

(b) (6) Could you pass this info along to whom ever needs it.
TF DBK averages (b) a day for P&A. For equipment rental it is (b) a day and (4) this includes construction EQ, pick-ups, phones. This totals (b) (4) a day. Thanks

(b) (6) CDR, TF Diamondback (b) (6)
-----Original Message----From:(b) (6) Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 10:43 AM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: RE: TRO for all projects in Arizona

(b)(5),(b)(6)

Thanks

Please note new cell phone number below

(b) (6)

Chief, Tactical Infrastructure Branch ECSO (b) (6) -----Original Message----From: (b) (6) Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 6:04 PM To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: Fw: TRO for all projects in Arizona All - need a rough order of magnitude cost for impacts to fence projects in your aor. Need it by daily cost impact

(b) (6) - can you provide cost impact for ng? Please reply back to all. Need a rough estimate tomorrow.
-----Original Message----From: (b) (6) To (b) (6) CC: (b) (6)

2007 Subject: Re: TRO for all projects in Arizona Thanks.

(b)(5), (b)(6)

Thanks (b) (6) -------------------------Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld -----Original Message----From:(b) (6) To: (b) (6) CC: (b) (6) Sent: Thu Nov 01 17:21:28 2007 Subject: TRO for all projects in Arizona

(b) (6)
Can you all create an estimate for all the costs that we will incur for the stop work on all projects in Arizona . Please consider costs associated with the contractors staff and equipment, and security for material (if any) and the staff you all hired to cover Title II services. (b) (6) have requested that the number be determined as a "cost per day" and seperated per project. He mentioned he needed an estimate by tomorrow. Thanks, (b) (6)

(b) (6) PF-225 Program Manager

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 819 Taylor Street (4A05) Fort Worth, Texas 76102

(b) (6)

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY ( RE: a sample of some of New Mexico Governor Richardson"s opposition to a "fence" Wednesday, May 16, 2007 5:19:38 AM

Things are heating up. -----Original Message----From: (b) (6) Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 9:45 PM To: SELF, JEFFREY D Subject: Fw: a sample of some of New Mexico Governor Richardson's opposition to a "fence" This came up at the esc -- just fyi ----- Original Message ----From: (b) (6) To: (b) (6) GIDDENS, GREGORY; ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6) Sent: Tue May 15 18:47:35 2007 Subject: a sample of some of New Mexico Governor Richardson's opposition to a "fence" USA Today-- May 2, 2007 LAS VEGAS (AP) — Presidential hopeful Bill Richardson repeated his opposition to building a fence along the U.S.-Mexico border on Tuesday and suggested his Democratic opponents who backed the idea did so for political reasons. "They were mistaken," the New Mexico governor said of Democrats who voted to build the 700-mile wall along the border in September. "It was a vote before the election — ill conceived." Washington Post - December 6, 2006 New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson says a fence at the Mexican border authorized by Congress this fall "gets in the way" of U.S.-Mexico relations, and he wants the new Democratic Congress to reverse the legislation. "The fence is very unpopular on the border in Texas and New Mexico, in Chihuahua," Richardson, a Democrat, said after meeting Wednesday with leaders from the Mexican state of Chihuahua. "So one of the most significant and constructive acts the U.S. Congress should take is to get rid of it." <javascript:void(popitup('http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/photo/2006/12/06/PH2006120601881.html',650,850))> Richardson said he will call on Congress not to build the fence during an address Thursday. He also will press lawmakers to approve a bill that secures the border and provides a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. While Congress and President Bush approved the 700-mile border fence, a widely debated bill overhauling immigration policy died in Congress this year. Richardson For "President" Website -- December 7, 2007 Speech to Georgetown University "Securing the border must come first -- but we must understand that building a fence will not in any way accomplish that objective. No fence ever built has stopped history and this one wouldn't either. The Congress should abandon the fence, lock, stock, and barrel. It flies in the face of America as a symbol of freedom. This is what we should do: immediately put enough National Guard troops at the border to keep it covered until we can secure it with Border Patrol officers. That should take no longer than three years. If it takes another year, let's do it. Second, we must hire and train enough Border Guards to actually cover the entire border. I have spent a lot of time at the border and I know we cannot secure it with a fence, but we can secure it with enough trained Border Patrol officers. I propose doubling the number of Border Patrol agents from

approximately 12-thousand to 24-thousand. That would secure the border. And you could more than pay for it with the funding for the first segment of that ill-advised fence between, Mexico and the United States. Real security, real results, at a fraction of the financial or political cost. Third, we should give the Border Patrol the benefit of the best surveillance equipment available to our military. And, as suggested by Texas Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, a leader on immigration issues, we should implement a system of "informant visas" and cash rewards for aliens who provide law enforcement with information on human traffickers and document forgers." December 17, 2006 Quote "They passed this bill for this stupid fence, this horrendous symbol,'' he said. "It's not fully funded. It's so unpopular and not just with Hispanics. The border states hate it, business leaders hate it. It was this terrible vote in the last session, and it was just to convince voters they were serious, but it backfired on the extremists if you look at the election returns.'' May 15, 2007 Chief of Staff to Governor Richardson in tele con with CBP Office of the Commissioner... "the Governor is wholly opposed to any border fence."

(b) (6) Department of Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection Special Advisor to the Commissioner (b) (6)

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY (

Rowdy.Adams (b) Re: NAC S1 Meeting Tomorrow, RE:SBInet/Border Fence Wednesday, May 09, 2007 5:34:35 PM

(6)

(b) (6)
I'm not in today and not sure what the nuts and bolts of this is. Can you give me a little more and I might be able to direct you. Jeff ----- Original Message ----From: (b) (6) To: SELF, JEFFREY D; (b) (6) 'Adams, Rowdy D' (b) (6) Sent: Wed May 09 17:25:40 2007 Subject: NAC S1 Meeting Tomorrow, RE:SBInet/Border Fence Gents, It appears that (b) (6) will now be attending the S1 meeting at the NAC at 1000 hrs, tomorrow. He is asking for a pre-brief (tonight) for this meeting (tomorrow). I am assuming he means an internal pre-brief for him from OBP. He is meeting with (b) (6) on an unrelated topic at this moment and I sent an e-mail for clarification, unless one of you can clarify. What information do I need to capsulate for him in preparation for tomorrow's meeting? I will obviously do all of the leg-work if pointed in the right direction.

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Adjutant to the Deputy Chief HQ, Office of Border Patrol

(b) (6)

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

Read: RE: PF 225 brochure Wednesday, April 18, 2007 1:23:27 PM

Your message To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: RE: PF 225 brochure Sent: 4/18/2007 1:18 PM was read on 4/18/2007 1:23 PM.

From: To: Subject: Date: Importance:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

Read: El Paso Weekly PF225 report Tuesday, July 03, 2007 5:08:33 AM High

Your message To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: El Paso Weekly PF225 report Sent: 6/27/2007 7:07 PM was read on 6/27/2007 7:14 PM.

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY ( Read: Guidance on PF 225 Monday, May 07, 2007 6:28:33 PM

Your message To: SELF, JEFFREY D Cc: (b) (6) Subject: Guidance on PF 225 Sent: 5/7/2007 6:28 PM was read on 5/7/2007 6:29 PM.

From: To: Subject: Date: Importance:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY( Read: PF 225 Saturday, March 17, 2007 7:03:43 AM High

Your message To: SELF, JEFFREY D Cc: (b) (6) Subject: PF 225 Sent: 3/16/2007 9:52 AM was read on 3/16/2007 11:00 AM.

From: To: Subject: Date: Your message To: (b) (6)

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY ( Read: PF225 Spreadsheets Wednesday, March 28, 2007 10:18:22 PM

SELF, JEFFREY D; (b)

(6)

Subject: PF225 Spreadsheets Sent: 3/28/2007 7:51 AM was read on 3/28/2007 11:43 AM.

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY( Read: RE: Border Fence Thursday, April 26, 2007 5:12:45 AM

Your message To: SELF, JEFFREY D Cc: (b) (6) Subject: RE: Border Fence Sent: 4/25/2007 7:39 PM was read on 4/26/2007 5:10 AM.

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

Read: RE: Fence Lab Tuesday, June 05, 2007 4:40:09 PM

Your message To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: RE: Fence Lab Sent: 6/5/2007 4:33 PM was read on 6/5/2007 4:39 PM.

From: To: Subject: Date: Importance:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY ( Read: RE: PF225 RGV discussions 17/18 May Monday, May 21, 2007 1:43:14 PM High

Your message To: (b) (6) VITIELLO, RONALD D; (b) (6) Subject: RE: PF225 RGV discussions 17/18 May Sent: 5/21/2007 1:36 PM was read on 5/21/2007 1:43 PM.

SELF, JEFFREY D

From: To: Subject: Date: Your message To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6)

Read: RE: Updated Fence Lab Sunday, June 24, 2007 1:36:52 AM

Subject: RE: Updated Fence Lab Sent: 6/22/2007 4:23 PM was read on 6/22/2007 4:33 PM.

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

Read: RE: Fence Lab Monday, June 18, 2007 1:07:22 PM

Your message To: (b) (6) Cc: (b) (6) Subject: RE: Fence Lab Sent: 6/18/2007 12:41 PM was read on 6/18/2007 1:07 PM.

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY( Read: NAC S1 Meeting Tomorrow, RE:SBInet/Border Fence Wednesday, May 09, 2007 5:35:39 PM

Your message To: SELF, JEFFREY D; (b) (6) 'Adams, Rowdy D' Subject: NAC S1 Meeting Tomorrow, RE:SBInet/Border Fence Sent: 5/9/2007 5:26 PM was read on 5/9/2007 5:35 PM.

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

Request for Information Tuesday, June 05, 2007 1:43:57 PM

(b) (6) I am looking for some guidance regarding public comment periods for two projects. The CORPS is expressing an interest in shortening the time frame for public comment. The reason this is under consideration is that the requirement for public comment for construction in these areas was met during the generation of previous environmental documents. I am concerned with the political ramifications of a shortened or deleted comment period.
Projects Affected: 7 miles of vehicle barriers to be replaced with pedestrian fence – location is 4.5 mi. E of Sasabe POE to 2.5 mi. W of same POE. Issue requiring shortened time frame for public comment - I questioned (b) (6) his reply is attached. about it, and

(b) (6) We are not hurrying this project. The army corps keeps telling us that they have a july start date that was given to them by sbinet. We've had little to no say so on time frames. (b) (6)
I have a call in to (b) (6) hurry up. , but so far do not see a pressing reason to

1.5 mi. VB to be replaced with pedestrian fence (X2) – locations are 3 mi. E of Columbus NM POE to 1.5 Mi E of same POE and 1.5 mi. W of COL to 3 mi. W of same POE = total of 3 miles VB replaced with PED fence. Issue requiring shortened time frame for public comment – I am unable to verify any real need to shorten the time frame for this project. For these documents to be submitted for comment, the newspaper notification must be submitted by tomorrow, 6/6/07. I need to give the CORPS an answer.

(b) (6)

From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)

RGV Op Plan Tuesday, June 05, 2007 2:18:11 PM

(b) (6) Attached you will find RGV’s plan to address operational requirements when the proposed fence projects are completed. Please call should you have any questions.
Thanks,

(b) (6)

From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)

ROEs for PF-225 Friday, June 29, 2007 12:15:46 PM

All, The week on July 2-6, 2007, we will be attempting to get signed ROEs from the stakeholders listed below. The ROEs will be hand delivered. These ROEs are in reference to PF-225 and are applicable to both J-1 projects and J-3. All projects fall within New Mexico’s 2nd congressional district- Congressman Steve Pearce.
(b) (6)

Take Care,
(b) (6)

(b) (6)

Special Operations Supervisor El Paso Sector 8901 Montana Avenue El Paso, Texas 79925

From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)

SBI Project VB-200 Wednesday, April 25, 2007 11:49:46 AM

(b) (6) and (b) (6) SBI is gearing up the planning phase of VB-200 and was inquiring as to the specific locations where we wanted this deployment to focus its efforts. We would like to get with you guys on the actions you took to determine the PF-225 deployment locations and possibly use that as a template for the VB-200 plan. When you get a chance, can we (b) and I) get with you and go over a few things? (6) When you get a chance, can you let us know?
Thanks,

(b) (6) Assistant Chief Office of Border Patrol Tactical Infrastructure Branch (b) (6)

From: To:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

Subject: Date:

RESEND of Earlier EMAIL: REPORTING REQUIREMENT FOR SBInet OUTREACH Monday, April 30, 2007 11:40:44 AM

Outreach POCs, As this process continues, many of the program managers are requiring somewhat specific information in order to brief the Commissioner and the Secretary. The information you have been and continue to provide is being used to evaluate not only progress but direction for the project. SBInet is requesting that all Border Patrol Sectors within the PF-225 footprint, to supply HQ with quantitative information weekly. Please complete all highlighted information and return it to me by no

later than Monday May 7 th . Updates of this information will be due by the close of business every Friday until the project is complete.

The information being requested is simply totals of what you have been compiling since your Outreach Workshop. This should be essentially a fill in the blank. I would ask all SWB sectors to complete this requirement. They have been asking for information on all of the SWB sectors. Any questions or concerns then please contact me at the numbers listed below. Thanks in advance.

PRIVATE LANDOWNERS (all non-federally owned land)
Number………………………..…X Number contacted……............X Number of concern……...........X Number of miles of concern.....X

PUBLIC LANDOWNERS (only federally owned land)
Number………………………..…X Number contacted……............X Number of concern……...........X Number of miles of concern.....X

(b) (6) Assistant Chief OPA Division Office of Border Patrol 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 6.5E Washington, D.C. 20229 (b) (6)

From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY ( SBInet Rollout Thursday, May 17, 2007 9:59:40 AM

(b) (6) (b) (6) came to talk with me about SBInet. He works in SPEC Ops and handles Native American issues. He would like to get a schedule of locations where SBInet plans to deploy resources. His concern is the same as what we have been dealing with over the past three weeks - getting the RIGHT word out to the tribes before something blows up.
He already knows about P28, P37, PF225, etc. He is mostly interested in northern border locations. We all understand that future SBInet planning is akin trying to nail Jello to the wall. Having said that, can we get a tentative roll-out schedule for SBInet for the next 2-3 years? Point me to whoever I need to speak with. (b) (6) is only interested in locations and is not concerned about what may actually be deployed. Just FYI - Chief Adams has agreed to make an SBInet presentation to the National Native American Law Enforcement Association this October in Memphis. Thanks.

(b) (6) Branch Chief Analysis Branch Operations Planning and Analysis Division Office of Border Patrol (b) (6)

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

Sector Tasking Monday, April 30, 2007 10:38:16 AM

Below you will find information being requested from all sectors for the SBInet Outreach Program. SBInet is requesting that all Border Patrol Sectors within the PF-225 footprint supply HQ with quantitative information weekly. Please complete all highlighted information and return to (b) (6) by close of business Friday, May 4, 2007. Updates of this information will be due by the close of business every Friday until this project is complete. The information being requested is the result of work that you have already done, so by now you should only need to fill in the blanks. The information being requested is: Private Landowners Number............X Number contacted......X Number of concern.......X Number of miles of concern..X Public Landowners Number............X Number contacted......X Number of concern.......X Number of miles of concern..X

From: To:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY ( ; (b)

(6)

Subject: Date:

Secure Fence Act Tuesday, September 19, 2006 4:58:41 PM

You may have seen this already, but the Secure Fence Act of 2006 passed in House on Thursday and has been sent to the Senate. Attached is the Bill.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

Assistant Chief, HQOBP Souther Border Operations

Congressman wants a fence along the border
By Rep. Jerry Weller Congressman Homeland security begins with border security. The Secure Fence Act of 2006, passed by the House Thursday, is not just about stemming the tide of illegal immigration; it's about strengthening vulnerability in this country's Global War on Terror, its war on drugs, and its overall law enforcement capability. Over the summer, the House conducted a series of field hearings to assess the state of our nation's borders. Their findings were an emphatic wake-up call to the need for stronger borders. The testimony in these hearings from Border Patrol agents and everyday citizens detailed the troubling activity along our southwestern border: assaults on Border Patrol agents, drug trafficking, organized crime along both the Mexican and U.S. sides, and a terrorist threat that only increases with time. This is why the Senate must join the House by acting immediately to strengthen our borders. To that end, the Secure Fence Act does the following: * Provides for more than 700 miles of two-layered reinforced fencing along the southwest border, and an evaluation of infrastructure needs along our northern border. * Mandates that the Department of Homeland Security create a "virtual fence" with cameras, ground sensors, and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles to provide state-of-the-art surveillance. * Gives Border Patrol agents the authority to disable fleeing vehicles, similar to the authority now given to the United States Coast Guard.

The provisions in the Secure Fence Act build upon actions we in Congress have already taken to secure our borders. We passed the REAL ID Act, which makes it extremely difficult for people here illegally to obtain a driver's license. Since 2001, we have increased border security funding by 66 percent, to more than $7.6 billion. The Border Patrol has expanded from 9,000 to 12,000 agents. These agents have apprehended more than 6 million people entering the U.S. illegally. Congress also put an end to the old practice of "catch and release" of illegal immigrants. These steps will be bolstered by the Secure Fence Act to provide additional security in the homeland. According to the House Committee on Homeland Security, al Qaeda itself views our borders as vulnerable. Imagine the enticement to terrorists of a border that functions more like a sieve. If we do not address this weakness, we will remain continually susceptible to the threat of a terrorist exploiting a porous border to launch an attack on our citizens. In addition, border fencing has proven to be an effective deterrent to illegal immigration. It is my view that we cannot begin to address the illegal immigration issue in this county until we stop the proliferation of the problem. In 1996, Congress mandated the construction of a 14mile fence along the San Diego-Mexican border. By 2005, illegal immigration arrests in that region had dropped by 95 percent and the crime rate was cut nearly in half. Clearly, this method of deterrence has a proven record of success. The Secure Fence Act is an important start to securing our nation's borders. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to follow the House's lead on this bill, and provide the president a chance to sign this measure into law.

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

Stakeholders Friday, June 01, 2007 11:39:38 AM

(b) (6) There are 778 stakeholders identified thus far for PF225 and 341 hsve yet to be contacted. (b) (6)

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY ( Stand by projects Tuesday, May 08, 2007 1:20:52 PM

Chief, Just letting you know that on the "hip pocket" fence projects, we will have to some prep work. we are going to approve ACE to go with our agents to the County Assessors Office to identify the land owners. They will not be allowed to do anything else. Your thoughts? Jeff

From: To: Subject: Date:

(b) (6)

SELF, JEFFREY ( ; (b) (6) TO Article Friday, September 22, 2006 8:20:03 AM

FYI
(b) (6)

_____________________

(b) (6)

Assistant Chief, HQOBP Souther Border Operations

Border fence would need support of Tohono O'odham tribe
New York Times News Service Sept. 19, 2006 05:51 PM TOHONO O'ODHAM RESERVATION, Ariz. - The Senate is expected to vote Wednesday on legislation to build a double-layered 700-mile-long fence on the Mexican border, a proposal already approved by the House. If the fence is built, however, it could have a long gap - about 75 miles - at one of the border's most vulnerable points because of opposition from the Indian tribe here. More illegal immigrants are caught - and die trying to cross into the United States - in and around the Tohono O'odham Indian territory, which straddles the Arizona border, than any other spot in the state. Tribal leaders have cooperated with Border Patrol enforcement, but they promised to fight the building of a fence out of environmental and cultural concerns. For the Tohono O'odham, which means "desert people," the reason is fairly simple. For generations, their people and the wildlife they revere have freely crossed the border. For years, an existing 4-foot-high cattle fence has had several openings - essentially cattle gates - that tribal members use to visit relatives and friends, take children to school and perform rites on the other side. "I am O'odham first, and American or Mexican second or third," said Ramon Valenzuela, as he walked his two children to school through one gate two miles from his O'odham village in Mexico. But the pushed-up bottom strands of the cattle fence and the surrounding desert littered with clothing, water jugs and discarded backpacks testify to the growth in illegal immigrant traffic, which surged here after a Border Patrol enforcement squeeze in California and Texas in the mid-1990s. Crossers take advantage of a remote network of washes and trails - and sometimes Indian guides - to reach nearby highways bound for cities across the country. Tribal members, who once gave water and food to the occasional passing migrant, say they have become fed up with groups of illegal immigrants breaking into homes and stealing food, water, clothing, and even using indoor and outdoor electrical outlets to charge cell phones. With tribal police, health and other services overwhelmed by illegal immigration, the Indians welcomed National Guard members this summer to assist the Border Patrol here. The tribe, after negotiations with the Department of Homeland Security, also agreed to a plan for concrete vehicle barriers at the fence and the grading of the dirt

road parallel to it for speedier Border Patrol and tribal police access. The Indians also donated a parcel this year for a small Border Patrol substation and holding pen. Tribal members, however, fearing the symbolism of a solid wall and concern about the free range of deer, wild horses, coyotes, jackrabbits and other animals they regard as kin, said they would fight the kind of steel-plated fencing that Congress had in mind and that has slackened the crossing flow in previous hot spots like San Diego. "Animals and our people need to cross freely," said Verlon Jose, a member of the tribal council representing border villages. "In our tradition we are taught to be concerned about every living thing as if they were people. We don't want that wall." The federal government, the trustee of all Indian lands, could build the fence here without tribal permission, but that option is not being pressed because officials said it might jeopardize the tribe's cooperation on smuggling and other border crimes. "We rely on them for cooperation and intelligence and phone calls about illegal activity as much as they depend on us to respond to calls," said Chuy Rodriguez, a spokesman for the Border Patrol in Tucson, who described overall relations as "getting better and better." The Tohono number more than 30,000, including 14,000 on the Arizona reservation and 1,400 in Mexico. Building a fence would impose many challenges, apart from the political difficulties. When steel fencing and other resources went up in California and Texas, migrant traffic shifted to the rugged terrain here, and critics say more fencing will simply force crossers to other areas without the fence. Or under it, as evidenced by the growth in the number of tunnels discovered near San Diego. The shift in traffic to more remote, treacherous terrain also has led to hundreds of deaths of crossers, including scores on tribal land here. The effort to curtail illegal immigration has proved especially difficult on the reservation, whose 2.8 million acres, about the size of Connecticut, make it the second largest in area. Faced with poverty and unemployment, an increasing number of tribal members are turning to migrant and drug smuggling, tribal officials say. Just this year, the tribal council adopted a law barring the harboring of illegal immigrants in homes, a gesture to show it is taking a "zero tolerance" stand, said the tribal chairwoman, Vivian Juan-Saunders. Two members of Juan-Saunders' family have been convicted of drug smuggling in the past several years, and she said virtually every family had been touched by drug abuse, smuggling or both. Sgt. Ed Perez of the tribal police said members had been offered $400 per person to transport illegal immigrants from the reservation to Tucson, a 90-minute drive, and much more to carry drugs. The Border Patrol and tribal authorities say the increase in manpower and technology is yielding results. Deaths are down slightly, 55 this year compared with 62 last year, and arrests of illegal immigrants in the Border Patrol sectors covering the reservation are up about 10 percent. But the influx of agents, many of whom are unfamiliar with the territory or Tohono ways, has brought complaints that the agents have interfered with tribal ceremonies, entered property uninvited and tried to block members crossing back and forth.

Juan-Saunders said helicopters swooped low and agents descended on a recent ceremony, apparently suspicious of a large gathering near the border, and she has complained to supervisors about agents speeding and damaging plants used for medicine and food. Some traditional and activist tribal members later this month are organizing a conference among eight Indian nations on or near the border to address concerns here and elsewhere. "We are in a police state," said Michael Flores, a tribal member helping to organize the conference. "It is not a tranquil place anymore." Rodriguez acknowledged the concerns but said agents operated in a murky world where a rush of pickups from a border village just might be tribal members attending an all-night wake, or something else. "Agents make stops based on what they see," he said. "Sometimes an agent sees something different from what tribal members or others see." Agents, he added, are receiving more cultural training, including a new cultural awareness video just shot with the help of tribal members. "Our relations have come a long way" in the past decade, he said.

Valenzuela said several agents knew him and waved as he traveled across the border but others have stopped him, demanding identification. Once, he said, he left at home a card that identifies him as a tribal member and an agent demanded that he go back into Mexico and cross at the official port of entry in Sasabe, 20 miles away. "I told him this is my land, not his," said Valenzuela, who was finally allowed to proceed after the agent radioed supervisors.

Valenzuela said he would not be surprised if a big fence eventually went up, but Juan-Saunders said she would affirm the tribe's concerns to Congress and the Homeland Security department. She said she would await final word on the fence and its design before taking action. She said that members of Congress she has met "recognize we pose some unique issues to them and that was really what we are attempting to do, to educate them to our unique situation." The House last week approved a Republican-backed bill 238-138 calling for double-layer fencing along a third of the 2,000-mile-long border, roughly from Calexico, Calif., to Douglas, Ariz. There is considerable support for the idea in the Senate, although the proposal's outcome with President Bush remains uncertain. The Homeland Security secretary, Michael Chertoff, has expressed doubts about sealing the border with fences.

From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Updated Fence Lab Friday, June 15, 2007 4:35:53 PM

J

Gents, Just an updated version of the site visit form for the Fence Lab team to El Paso the first week of July, reflecting additional personnel and one tentative attendee. I do not have contact information for (b) (6) V/r (b) (6) Liaison, CBP Air & Marine SBI Program Mgmt. Office Mission Engineering Division (b) (6)

From: To:

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Updated PF225 project list Monday, June 25, 2007 6:57:15 PM

Cc:

Subject: Date:

All: Here is the updated PF225 project list. Changes to note include: Neeley Crossing - added 1.5 miles Added K-2A back into the spreadsheet Both of the above items were requests made by OBP HQ and/or Sector. Also, please review the RE and EV columns as new/revised info from the OBP outreach has been incorporated. Any future changes to these columns must be forwarded to SBI/CBP/EV IPT/ RE IPT in order to make sure that all agencies are informed of the changes prior to a new version of the spreadsheet being produced. Please note the file name includes the date of 6-25-07 and is the most up to date copy of this document.

(b) (6) (b) (2) (b) (6)

(b) (6)

Project Manager USACE-PM-ECSO

From: To: Subject: Date: Importance:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

Updated PF225 Spreadsheet Wednesday, June 06, 2007 11:49:20 AM High

(b) (6) Got it. It looks alright, though I will give it a good going over. I am shooting off the email to the Sectors as soon as I get back from a quick lunch. I know you were going to call Jeff, so I’ll hold off until then in case you have instructions. Please give the following email a quick look. Also, I left you a voice mail, which you can ignore. (b) (6) All,
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) will be mailing out Environmental Assessment notification letters to the appropriate Native American tribes in your respective areas of operations, as well as to the appropriate State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPO.) The letters will explain site location of possible infrastructure insertion. These assessments do not imply that work will definitely be done. It is recommended that you conduct a Risk Assessment based on your relationship with recipients to identify the appropriate method of notification. Your analysis should determine the mode of communication e.g. face-to-face meeting, telephonic notification, etc. Our objective is to reach out to the recipients in advance of the letters, to explain the purpose. This will require immediate response, as the letters are mailed via Federal Express, and will arrive the day after they are sent. USACE mailed the Santa Teresa project letters yesterday, June 5, 2007. The Nogales project letters will go Friday. Attached is a copy of the letter sent to the tribes for each project, as well as the letter to the appropriate State Historic Preservation Officer. Accompanying these letters is the list of the tribes to receive the letters. I have sent this correspondence to all of the SBI Points of Contact (If I missed anyone, please let me know.) If there is any question as to which Sector bears responsibility for any contact(s) please ask. The letters to the SHPO should be reviewed for specific contact information.

From: To:

(b) (6) (b) (6)

Cc: Subject: Date:

(b) (6)

Weekly Reporting Requirement Monday, April 30, 2007 10:54:08 AM

Outreach POCs, As this process continues, many of the program managers are requiring somewhat specific information in order to brief the Commissioner and the Secretary. The information you have been and continue to provide is being used to evaluate not only progress but direction for the project. SBInet is requesting that all Border Patrol Sectors within the PF-225 footprint, to supply HQ with quantitative information weekly. Please complete all highlighted information and return it to me by no

later than Monday May 7 th . Updates of this information will be due by the close of business every Friday until the project is complete.

The information being requested is simply totals of what you have been compiling since your Outreach Workshop. This should be essentially a fill in the blank. I would ask all SWB sectors to complete this requirement. They have been asking for information on all of the SWB sectors. Any questions or concerns then please contact me at the numbers listed below. Thanks in advance.

PRIVATE LANDOWNERS (all non-federally owned land)
Number………………………..…X Number contacted……............X Number of concern……...........X Number of miles of concern.....X

PUBLIC LANDOWNERS (only federally owned land)
Number………………………..…X Number contacted……............X Number of concern……...........X Number of miles of concern.....X

(b) (6) Assistant Chief OPA Division Office of Border Patrol 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 6.5E Washington, D.C. 20229 (b) (6)

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful