OBP004982

From: ADAMS, ROWDY D

To: (b) (6) ; GIDDENS, GREGORY; Adams, Rowdy D; (b) (6)
Subject: RE: Conversation with OCA re: Hidalgo
Date: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 10:07:57 AM

(b)
(6)
We (SBI) will start the draft of the initial doc and forward for comment.

Rowdy

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:59 AM
To: (b) (6) ; GIDDENS, GREGORY; Adams, Rowdy D; (b) (6)

Subject: RE: Conversation with OCA re: Hidalgo

On the legislative fix issue, I don’t know if it is productive to debate its necessity further. OCC
reviewed and concluded on that and the Secretary then followed that guidance. (b) (5)

It was clearly articulated by the Secretary privately and publicly to the locals and the Senators that
going in this combined levee/fence direction was contingent upon the legislative fix. Both Senators
said they would get the fix done. Whether it will in fact be harder for them to get it done than they
anticipated doesn’t change the commitment they made or the need for it in order to proceed.

I spoke with DHS CoS yesterday who was going to have S1 reach out and try and impart some
urgency to Senators Cornyn and Hutchison. He needs a short draft note for S1 to send to the two
Senators reminding them of their commitment to pursue the legislative fix, the fact that our announced
plans for the levee/fence remain dependent on that fix and then attach again the technical fix
language. Who wants to take a crack at drafting that short note/letter with the technical language also
attached for us?

(b) (6)

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 5:35 PM
To: (b) (6) GIDDENS, GREGORY; Adams, Rowdy D; (b) (6)

Cc: (b) (6)

Subject: RE: Conversation with OCA re: Hidalgo

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

I’m sure we will discuss this more tomorrow when (b) (6) is back

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 5:06 PM
OBP004983

To: (b) (6) ; GIDDENS, GREGORY; Adams, Rowdy D; (b) (6)

Cc: (b) (6)

Subject: RE: Conversation with OCA re: Hidalgo

(b) (b) (5)

(b) (5)

I’m happy to discuss.

-(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Office of Chief Counsel
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(b) (6)
fax

ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED/ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT

This communication might contain communications between attorney and client, communications that are part of the agency
deliberative process, or attorney -work product, all of which are privileged and not subject to disclosure outside the agency or to the
public. Please consult with the Office of Chief Counsel, U.S. Customs and Border Protection before disclosing any information
contained in this email.

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 4:33 PM
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; Adams, Rowdy D; (b) (6)

Subject: RE: Conversation with OCA re: Hidalgo

Greg, That email got spelled checked wrong – I did not mean or intend ever to stop pending
legislation – there is no pending legislation. I did say everyone on the Hill thinks it would be
impossible to get a bill passed in the Senate with a Hidalgo provision, passed in the House,
conferenced between the 2 chambers, and signed by the President by the end of March…
That’s even if such a provision wasn’t controversial, which it probably will be.

My email was intended to get on the same page re whether we asked the Corps to build the
fence/ levee – apparently, the Corp has authority to provide grants where we cannot – it
solves the legislative problem if we simply make an agreement with the corps to construct.
OBP004984

(b) (6) our conversation yesterday seemed to confirm this (and I know the (b) (6) is still
in the Artic), but can we get on the same page on this? Would this indeed solve the
problem? I believe (b) (6) wanted to ask SBI whether we have ever asked the Corp to do
this.
(b) (6) have you gotten any further on your research? The client here is CBP of course.

Thanks, (b)
(6)
From: GIDDENS, GREGORY [mailto:GREGORY.Giddens@dhs.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 4:11 PM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: Adams, Rowdy D
Subject: Fw: Conversation with OCA re: Hidalgo
Importance: High

(b) ,
Do not stop the legislation. We explored all the options already.
(6)
After that, we went through CBP to DHS and S1 on the need for the legislative remedy. Without the fix, we will
not have the levee fence.

Greg G

------Original Message------
From: (b) (6)
To: 'FLOSSMAN, LOREN W'
Cc: Greg GIDDENS
Cc: ADAMS, ROWDY D
Sent: Mar 4, 2008 2:01 PM
Subject: FW: Conversation with OCA re: Hidalgo

Loren –

Please hold. This is a bit out of hand….Greg is engaging.

(b) (6)

_____________________________________________
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 2:00 PM
To: ADAMS, ROWDY D; GIDDENS, GREGORY
Subject: FW: Conversation with OCA re: Hidalgo
Importance: High

OK…it’s worse than I thought. I think he says here he stopped the legislation.

(b) (6)

_____________________________________________
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1:09 PM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: Conversation with OCA re: Hidalgo
Importance: High
OBP004985

. <<RE: Border Security Technology Legislation>> (b) (6) See below email from (b) (6) and attached
email.