Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

From: (b) (6)

To: (b) (6)


Subject: RE: Planning for RGV Public Meetings
Date: Monday, December 03, 2007 4:47:45 PM

So does this mean you don’t have to go to any of these? If so, congrats to you! I think someone from
our office will have to go, barring any major blow-ups here.. Chief even asked if one of us (kanon or I)
was going, and seemed to think that we should.

From: (b) (6)


Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 3:41 PM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: Re: Planning for RGV Public Meetings

(b) (6) and(b) got it also.


(6)
----- Original Message -----
From: (b) (6) gov>
To: (b) (6) >
Sent: Mon Dec 03 15:39:41 2007
Subject: Re: Planning for RGV Public Meetings

Is this being/has this been relayed to SBI yet? I think Loren needs to get the info out today so it can be posted in
the FR.

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


From: (b) (6)
To: (b) (6)
Sent: Mon Dec 03 15:13:44 2007
Subject: Fw: Planning for RGV Public Meetings

I guess I got out of that!

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


From: (b) (6)
To: (b) (6) PAGAN, DAVID G. (b) (6)

Cc: Self, Jeffrey D (b) (6)


GIDDENS, GREGORY; VITIELLO, RONALD D
Sent: Mon Dec 03 15:09:00 2007
Subject: RE: Planning for RGV Public Meetings

Folks,

Following a discussion with Greg Giddens and a request that BP provide 3 agents rather than 2 in order to have all
three operational areas of RGV represented and accessible to the people who will have questions pertaining to their
area, OBP agrees that this can work as long as we keep to the concept of BP playing a lesser role in the effort. We
will not send a BP rep from HQ, but rather allow RGV to select the folks they believe will be able to present the
best operational perspective.
(b)
(6)

________________________________

From: (b) (6)


Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 1:42 PM
To: (b) (6) PAGAN, DAVID G.; (b) (6)
Cc: Self, Jeffrey D
Subject: RE: Planning for RGV Public Meetings

Sir,

RGV is on board concerning BP participation.

Thanks,

(b)
(6)

________________________________

From: (b) (6)


Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 12:37 PM
To: PAGAN, DAVID G.; (b) (6)
Cc: (b) (6) Self, Jeffrey D
Subject: RE: Planning for RGV Public Meetings

I’ll weigh in on this one.

(b) (6)

We had heard that the discussion last week was that BP would have Chief Vitiello giving an operational speech
each hour of the event, and there would be a uniformed agent at every booth to talk operations as needed. We met
with Chief Aguilar this morning because we were concerned that the format of Chief Vitiello up in front giving a
speech every hour and having a BP agent at every booth was placing way too much focus on BP, and would serve
to facilitate debate over the “wall” rather than maintaining focus on the environmental issues.
We feel that, although Border Patrol needs to be in attendance, BP shouldn’t be the focal point of the event. In
order to meet the requirements of providing our operational voice to the community without distracting the event
away from its primary purpose, we believe that BP should staff a booth with no more than two agents (one from
HQ and one from RGV) who can talk to the operational piece.

Chief Vitiello is onboard with this thought process as well, and is looking at other ways to get his face out there
with the community in a format that will be less likely to be drawn into debate with people who have specific
political agendas.

(b)
(6)

________________________________

From: PAGAN, DAVID G. (b) (6)


Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 1:22 PM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: (b) (6) VITIELLO, RONALD D; Self, Jeffrey D
Subject: RE: Planning for RGV Public Meetings

Sirs,

I advise you double-check with OBP HQ; I am not sure SBI staff have the latest info on BP participation.

Thank you,
David

_____________________________________________
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 1:20 PM
To: PAGAN, DAVID G.; (b) (6)

Cc: (b) (6)

Subject: RE: Planning for RGV Public Meetings

Thanks David.

I may have heard the discussion of the booths differently.

Request e2M respond as soon as possible on how many booths there are currently planned, and how many they
envisioned OBP would participate in.
(b) and(b) obviously you have the final call on which booths the Sector participates on.
(6) (6)
Thanks again.

(b) (6)
Secure Border Initiative
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(b) (6)
For more information about the Secure Border Initiative, visit (b) (2) or
contact us at(b) (2) .

_____________________________________________
From: PAGAN, DAVID G.
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 1:13 PM
To: (b) (6)

Cc: (b) (6)

Subject: RE: Planning for RGV Public Meetings

(b)
(6)
Thanks for keeping this moving along. I don't think this duplicates any efforts.

However, I believe we need to clarify further re: OBP - the latest option I am aware of is a minimal presence with 1
booth for BP (RGV Sector + HQ staff) to discuss operational requirements for the Sector. The focus of the session
would be on the NEPA process and public input on the Draft EIS. I believe the answer to your question #1 will
help inform our next steps; I would ask that we work this internally at CBP before looping in USACE.

On the potential 3rd meeting, I am working this issue here at CBP with the goal of getting an answer today; per my
conversation with e2m on Friday, we would need to make a decision today so we could meet newspaper insertion
deadlines for later this week.

Thanks again for your help,


David

David G. Pagan
Advisor to the Commissioner and State & Local Liaison
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Department of Homeland Security
(b) (6)

_____________________________________________
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 12:51 PM
To: (b) (6)

PAGAN, DAVID G.'; (b) (6)


(b) (6)

Cc: (b) (6)

Subject: RE: Planning for RGV Public Meetings

Good afternoon.

I have a few quick updates and a rush information request.

1. OBP has requested, and C-1 has agreed, that the Border Patrol will step back further from these sessions. Border
Patrol participation will be minimal, manning the three booths that were discussed on Friday.

QUESTION: How were these three booths divided? Was it according to upper, middle, and lower Rio Grande
Valley like the maps originally posted to the website? Anyone who knows, please remind me as soon as possible.

2. The potential third meeting is still up in the air. According to Asset Management, we will need to publicize a
third meeting in the Federal Register, with a deadline of COB tomorrow to submit the notice. David, I think you
have the lead on this, and are probably already coordinating to find out necessary information. I guess we know
when our deadline is now.

3. (b) (6) who is the SBI Tactical Infrastructure Deputy Program Manager, will be the primary speaker for
the short presentations and be the face of the event.

I apologize if I am duplicating effort, but I’m being asked questions by(b)


(6)
(b) (6)
Secure Border Initiative
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(b) (6)
For more information about the Secure Border Initiative, visit (b) (2) or
contact us at (b) (2) .

-----Original Appointment-----
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 9:59 AM
To: (b) (6)

Cc: (b) (6)

Subject: Planning for RGV Public Meetings


When: Friday, November 30, 2007 1:00 PM-2:00 PM (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).
Where: Conference Room 7.5.C

Good afternoon.

Two weeks until the public meetings, and one week before the site visits to the convention centers.

Would like to get together for another discussion of our status.

Will provide a call-in line.


Thanks.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi