From: (b) (6)

To: GIDDENS, GREGOR( ; ADAMS, ROWDY (

Cc: (b) (6)
Subject: Re: Cuellar meeting
Date: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 6:41:35 AM

I was under the impression from previous discussions and meetings that I've been in on the issue that
the eradication effort was an S&T issue, so I must have missed the boat on that one!

Just let me know what time works for you all, and we'll coordinate with Chief Colburn's schedule.

Thanks!
(b)
(6)
----- Original Message -----
From: GIDDENS, GREGORY
To: (b) (6) ADAMS, ROWDY D
Cc: (b) (6)
Sent: Tue Mar 04 20:27:21 2008
Subject: Re: Cuellar meeting

It would be great to get together before we go up.

On the cane issue, that is a CBP SBI issue....S&T is doing some work on it, but CBP is driving it.

OBP recently agreed that SBI should have lead on the cane as part of the TI portfolio.

Greg G

Greg G

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

From: (b) (6)
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; ADAMS, ROWDY D
Cc: (b) (6)
Sent: Tue Mar 04 19:20:12 2008
Subject: Cuellar meeting

Hi Greg,

Wanted to check in with you on tomorrow’s meeting with Congressman Cuellar, and see if/when you
might have time to get together before the meeting at 4pm. As I’m sure you know from earlier today,
Chief Colburn is slated to go up and brief as well. At this point, the meeting that was once supposed to
be focused on Project 28/SBInet/other technology has evolved into a meeting on a variety of other
issues, to include Carrizo cane eradication and the Hidalgo levee fence issue.

For some reason Cuellar has in his mind that SBI is the lead for the Carrizo eradication effort, I think
because at an earlier briefing with him, you and/or Jeff Self referenced the fact that Chief Carrillo had
no fence plans for Laredo (at least for the time being) because of the existence of the Carrizo. We are
hoping to put to rest once and for all that this is NOT a CBP/SBI issue and have invited a rep from DHS
S&T to participate, since the eradication effort is led by them.
On the Hidalgo levee/fence issue, Cuellar is looking to receive information on the general status and
details of the project (when it will start, how it would impact levee integrity, who will be performing the
work, who will be responsible for maintaining the levee/fence). One question I had was on who would
have responsibility for maintaining the levee/fence if we are able to follow through with the project – I
know that IBWC “owns the levees” and thus maintains responsibility for their upkeep, but I’ve also sat in
on several meetings where it has been a point of contention since the project makes it
difficult/impossible to distinguish between what is “IBWC’s levee” and what is “CBP’s fence.”

Let me know if you’d like to get together tomorrow.

Thanks!

(b)
(6)