From: SELF, JEFFREY (

To: ADAMS, ROWDY ( ; (b) (6)

Subject: FW: SWB Maps - MAR, TCA, EPT
Date: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 6:44:09 AM

WHAT THE HELL IS THIS???!!!

-----Original Message-----
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 5:43 PM
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; 'ADAMS, ROWDY D';(b) (6) FLOSSMAN, LOREN
W; SELF, JEFFREY D
Cc: (b) (6)

Subject: RE: SWB Maps - MAR, TCA, EPT

Email 2 of 3 with SWB maps - MAR, TCA, EPT.

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

-----Original Message-----
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 5:41 PM
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; 'ADAMS, ROWDY D'; (b) (6) FLOSSMAN, LOREN
W; SELF, JEFFREY D
Cc: (b) (6)

Subject: FW: SWB Maps

All,

Attached are the first set of SWB maps by sector (email 1 of 3).

For PF, we do not currently have the data segmented by FY or CY, only by project:
--pre-PF70 (all legacy fence prior to July 2006),
--PF70 (starting in July 2006),
--PF225 (Sept 2007 through present).
The GIS shops will be working on segmenting the data by FY & CY for future use.

For VF, we do not have any data segmented by FY or CY, only planned & existing. The OBP/GIS shop
is currently working through adding constructed dates into the dataset. For planned VF, although we
have tentatively identified segments planned to be built by the end of CY08, VF300 has not yet been
baselined (meeting to review proposed baseline is scheduled for 13 Feb) and so the GIS data is not yet
segmented between "planned by CY08", and "planned end state". This should be done by mid-
February.

Rowdy(b) -- please let us know if you concur with these maps and forward to the Commissioner's
Office.(6)

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

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 5:10 PM
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6)
Subject:

C2 has advised that he would like the remaining maps this week.

What I think we should do is have SBI prepare the entire maps for the Tucson and El Paso Sectors (as
you did the Yuma Sector). Then, for the full SWB map and maps for remaining sectors (those for which
we don't have technology laydown yet), if SBI lays out the TI on the maps, I'm going to hand them
over to BP to fill in their strategy for controlling the border beyond TI. So, we'll need to get all but the
TUC and ELP maps from SBI ASAP...

Don’t we already have the pedestrian fencing laydown in the maps (b) (6) r walked S2 through
back in December?

-----Original Message-----
From: GIDDENS, GREGORY
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 9:32 AM
To: (b) (6) ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6)
Subject: Re: Feedback from C2 on SBI charts

Super. We can lay out the TI on the SWB, it is the tower location and numbers that need a lot of
engineering work.

Thanks,

Greg G
----- Original Message -----

From: (b) (6)

To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6)

Sent: Sat Feb 02 08:41:52 2008

Subject: Re: Feedback from C2 on SBI charts

Hi Greg. Re: the CY08/CY09 map issue would it work if, instead of replacing the "Near Term" map, we
just insert another map that's for CY08 and excludes all but the # of RRVS towers you think you'll have
deployed by the end of CY08?

As for deadline, we can set it for 2 weeks. If I hear different from C2 I'll let you know.

Re: maps for the sectors where you don't have details yet, I think a notional map that just identifies TI,
natural barriers, and general areas that we're looking to secure with radar and/or camera coverage
would be just fine.

----- Original Message -----

From: GIDDENS, GREGORY

To: (b) (6) ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6)

Sent: Sat Feb 02 07:15:31 2008

Subject: RE: Feedback from C2 on SBI charts

(b)
(6)

Thanks for your help and feedback from C2. The technology laydown will not happen until CY09. Also,
we will not have any technology laydown (tower placement) for anything beyond AZ and El Paso for a
long time, sometime into CY09. We do the laydown in association with preparing to deploy to the next
sector. We can do a notional technology overlay, but the number of towers and placement will not be
completed.

Next week is crazy with all the budget and Hill visits. Would like to have two weeks for the next round
of maps. We can provide them as they are developed.
Thanks,

Greg G

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 6:04 PM

To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; ADAMS, ROWDY D;(b) (6)

Subject: Feedback from C2 on SBI charts

He liked them! Only change he would like to make is instead of calling the 3rd chart “Near Term”, have
it reflect planned “End of CY 2008” laydown. He would like charts like these for the remainder of the
border and would also like a set of maps for the entire SWB at a much smaller level of detail. He didn’t
specify a date, but given his desired turn-around on this product, I expect he is going to want them
soon (like the end of next week). With ’09 hill budget briefings and hearings coming up, these would
be good to have. I know S2 also mentioned the need for something like these maps to him today, so
he’s particularly anxious to get them done.

I understand from Rowdy that planned technology laydown info is currently only available for Tucson,
Yuma and New Mexico and that it would take a while to complete those assessments for the remaining
sectors. Perhaps we can meet Monday morning to talk about how best to portray the maps for those
areas? It would be great if we had this map, as well as a draft of an entire SWB/strategic level set of
maps for the Tuesday Small Group ESC for the group to review/discuss…

Also, can you send copies of the chart to me (I gave C2 the only copy I had… sorry) and Jeff Self? I
want to make sure that OBP is in the loop on the development of these maps as I think they (the
maps) will be used as a tool to illustrate how we plan to gain operational control of the border through
the deployment of tactical infrastructure, technology, people and other assets (like aircraft, helos, UAS)
– and, obviously, BP needs to be in on that.

Thanks --- and sorry for the additional work, but at least we’re heading on the right track!

Have a nice weekend.

(b)
(6)