OBP005866

From: (b) (6)

To: (b) (6)
Subject: RE: Draft
Date: Monday, March 31, 2008 11:42:23 AM

Let us know if you need more info..

(b) (6) SBI/TI

Ops & Reporting Business Manager
(b) (6)

-----Original Message-----
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 11:34 AM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: RE: Draft

Thanks.

-----Original Message-----
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 11:31 AM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: RE: Draft

The 102 miles was described in a note #2 as FY09 mileage on V2 of the DOI Lands spreadsheet. The
note text was actually in error: the 102 included 56 miles of CY09 VF, 27 miles core CY08 VF, and a 19
mile CY08 contingency segment that was included by mistake (B-5A is a contingency segment for both
PF & VF but was already counted in the PF contingency miles).

(b) (6) SBI/TI

Ops & Reporting Business Manager
(b) (6)
-----Original Message-----
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 10:19 AM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: RE: Draft

(b)
A couple of questions....why did we end up with 56 miles of proposed 2009 VF and what are the other
(6)
46 miles (where)? Thanks. Chief(s) Self and Aguilar would like to know.
(b)
(6)
-----Original Message-----
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 8:56 AM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: Re: Draft

It is easier to understand if you look at the excel doc, but prob still a little hard to follow. If it doesn't
make sense after looking at it, I'll be happy to walk you through it & explain.

(b) (6) SBI/TI

(b) (6)

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

OBP005867

From: (b) (6)

To: (b) (6)
Sent: Mon Mar 31 06:01:56 2008
Subject: Fw: Draft

(b) (6)
Since I don't have my laptop, I was a little hard to follow and can't read excel doc on bb. Will I
understand better once I can see the doc? If not, I will need a breakdown on what we are covering in
the waiver. Thanks.
(b)
(6)
----- Original Message -----
From: (b) (6)
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY <gregory.giddens@dhs.gov>; (b) (6)

Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D <rowdy.adams@dhs.gov>; (b) (6)

FLOSSMAN, LOREN W <loren.flossman@dhs.gov>

Sent: Sun Mar 30 18:53:50 2008
Subject: RE: Draft

I added a reference to Hidalgo to the sentence that discusses the fact that some type of NEPA work had
been completed relative to 336 miles of fencing. I was afraid the last sentence in the paragraph relative
to Hidalgo would give the impression that an additional 22 miles of NEPA work had been accomplished
over and above the 336.

Attached is an updated version of the mileage summary workbook to reflect 500 mile waiver coverage
for the option that would not include 09 VF miles.

________________________________

From: GIDDENS, GREGORY [mailto:gregory.giddens@dhs.gov]

Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 3:47 PM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6) FLOSSMAN,
LOREN W
Subject: RE: Draft

All, let’s just use 500 and 550 instead of 495 and 550. The less specific is better…..500 is better than
495 when approximating.

Also, why did you delete the sentence about us “well begun the environmental process for Hidalgo”..
That was intended to indicate we had done the draft EIS without using the EA terms.

Greg G

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 11:26 AM

OBP005868

To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; (b) (6)

Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6) FLOSSMAN,
LOREN W
Subject: RE: Draft

Attached is an updated version of the mileage summary workbook. There are now two spreadsheets;
one with the 09 VF miles and one without. The note addressing the total mileage in the waiver has
been updated. We now show approximately 495 mile w/o 09 VF and approximately 550 with 09 VF-both
figures include approximately 25 miles associated with SBInet projects.

Also attached is an updated draft statement for S1 with suggested changes shown in track mode. Note
that the mileage amounts for both potential waiver coverage scenarios have been added to the
document so one will need to be removed when the waiver's final scope is known.

Finally, attached is the "S1 Q and A on consulting in mitigations" with one minor recommended change.

Thanks

(b)
(6)

________________________________

From: GIDDENS, GREGORY [mailto:gregory.giddens@dhs.gov]

Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 8:24 AM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6)
Subject: Re: Draft

Roger on both points.

I think have 550 in our previous version.

Greg G

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

From: (b) (6)
To: (b) (6) ; GIDDENS, GREGORY
<gregory.giddens@dhs.gov>; (b) (6)

Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D <rowdy.adams@dhs.gov>; (b) (6)

Sent: Sun Mar 30 08:21:42 2008

Subject: Re: Draft

With regards to fence miles covered in the waiver, I recommend using "approximately 530" as I'm
concerned that 531 suggests a level of precision that we honestly don't have. We should also probably
note in the spreadsheet that there are approximately 25 additional miles included in the waiver that are
associated with SBInet (so there are actually approximately 555 miles of border covered by the waiver).
OBP005869

Thoughts?
Thanks

(b)
Message sent from my Blackberry
(6)

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

From: (b) (6)
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY <gregory.giddens@dhs.gov>; (b) (6)

Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D <rowdy.adams@dhs.gov>; (b) (6)

Sent: Sat Mar 29 22:14:27 2008

Subject: RE: Draft

Ok, will do.

________________________________

From: GIDDENS, GREGORY [mailto:gregory.giddens@dhs.gov]

Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 10:09 PM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6)
Subject: RE: Draft

Please work with OBP map team to see if we can get the updated maps early Mon am by 0800 or so. I
exepct C2 to want to have a session early Mon am to catch up. We need the update CA, AZ, and NM
maps. After they are prionted, we need to re-draw the VF EA work coverage like we have on the
current version. I have the set with the hand-drawn indicators on them and will take them in Mon am
and leave them on my table. It went well for them to have the hand-drawn info on them; I want to do
the next set the same way.

Thanks,

Greg G

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 9:19 PM
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; (b) (6)
Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6)
Subject: RE: Draft

Here’s the spreadsheet updated with the 531 (475 + 56) in the notes.

J.
OBP005870

________________________________

From: GIDDENS, GREGORY [mailto:gregory.giddens@dhs.gov]

Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 9:12 PM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6)
Subject: Re: Draft

All,
For the answer to the following question:

In (2) text I changed in the notes in red. (b) – please updated, or let me know what the # of miles
in the waiver should be for note #2. (6)

I propose just adding the sttaight 56 miles to 475. 475 is just an estimate anyway and was
conservative to ensure complete coverage of all segments. We added back in 56 miles of 09 VF, so we
can just add 56 to the 475.

Greg G

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

From: (b) (6)
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY <gregory.giddens@dhs.gov>; (b) (6)

Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D <rowdy.adams@dhs.gov>; (b) (6)

Sent: Sat Mar 29 19:58:24 2008

Subject: RE: Draft

Here’s the updated

(1) “EA breakdown” / DOI Land tables (word doc)

(2) “DOI Land” / “Miles Managed” worksheet

In (1) I added a category for “FY 09” miles and changed “retrofit” to “Retrofit/Conversion”. (some VF
miles are being pulled out & replaced with PF, not actually retrofitted)

In (2) text I changed in the notes in red. (b) – please updated, or let me know what the # of miles
in the waiver should be for note #2. (6)

Let me know if you have questions. Will send the map table back in a few. Also, we need to update
the Secretary’s statement with new #’s & his Q&A on consultation/environmental consideration. Let me
know if you want me to do this.

Thanks,
OBP005871

(b) (6)

________________________________

From: GIDDENS, GREGORY [mailto:gregory.giddens@dhs.gov]

Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 6:48 PM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6)
Subject: RE: Draft

(b)
(6)
Thanks.

(b) (6)

Any ETA on the map tables and related info you were working on?

Thanks,

Greg G

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 6:45 PM
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; (b) (6)
Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D; (b) (6)
Subject: Re: Draft

We'll insert both sets of numbers (with and without 09 VF). Will have for you tomorrow.
Thanks

(b)
Message sent from my Blackberry
(6)

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

From: GIDDENS, GREGORY <gregory.giddens@dhs.gov>
To: (b) (6)

Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D <rowdy.adams@dhs.gov>

Sent: Sat Mar 29 17:30:16 2008
Subject: Re: Draft

Good point. We also need to have a set of numbers with the 09 miles in. S2 will press hard to get
them in the waiver.

Can you update it as if the 09 miles are in the waiver? Do not need today....
OBP005872

Greg G

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

From: (b) (6)
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY <gregory.giddens@dhs.gov>; (b) (6)

Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D <rowdy.adams@dhs.gov>

Sent: Sat Mar 29 17:08:20 2008
Subject: Re: Draft

These numbers assume the 09 VF miles are not in the waiver-is that what you intended?
Thanks

(b)
Message sent from my Blackberry
(6)

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

From: GIDDENS, GREGORY <gregory.giddens@dhs.gov>
To: (b) (6)

Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D <rowdy.adams@dhs.gov>

Sent: Sat Mar 29 14:59:44 2008
Subject: FW: Draft

Greg/(b)
(6)
I took a shot at filling what I could from the numbers I had. Please check my numbers, my version is
v2. Also, please see if you can craft a para or two per (b) request. I also attached the two related
Q&As you did yesterday. (6)

Thanks,

Greg G

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 2:05 PM
To: (b) (6) GIDDENS, GREGORY
Subject: RE: Draft

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 1:50 PM
To: (b) (6) GIDDENS, GREGORY
Subject: RE: Draft
OBP005873

Will attach doc momentarily.

________________________________

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 1:49 PM
To: (b) (6) GIDDENS, GREGORY
Subject: Draft

(b) Greg,
(6)

Close hold. The second paragraph of the enviro section in this – the latest draft of the S1 statement –
needs additional facts of the type I’ve been discussing with Greg this morning. I’d like to have them in
place when the Secretary next reviews the document, which will be as early as tomorrow. Essentially,
we need to be clear on miles, on what’s been done, on what will be done, and on what public
notification will be conducted before significant construction is done. If you can pack that into a
paragraph or two, I’d appreciate it. Also, pls review the rest, and call to discuss any changes you’d
suggest. Thanks.

(b) (6)

General Counsel, Acting

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

(b) (6)

Confidential Assistants:

(b) (6)

This message and any attachments may contain attorney-client communications, attorney work product,
and department deliberative communications, all of which may be privileged and not subject to
disclosure outside the department or to the public. Consult with the Department of Homeland Security,
Office of the General Counsel, before further disseminating any information contained in this e-mail.