Columbia Funds Series Trust I -

Annual N-SAR report for the period ending 07/31/11

CMG Ultra Short Term Bond Fund


Item 77B - Accountant's report on internal control

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


To the Trustees and Shareholders of Columbia Funds Series Trust I

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of CMG Ultra
Short Term Bond Fund (a series of Columbia Funds Series Trust I and hereafter
referred to as the "Fund") as of and for the year ended July 31, 2011, in
accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), we considered the Fund's internal control over
financial reporting, including controls over safeguarding securities, as a
basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our
opinion on the financial statements and to comply with the requirements of
Form N-SAR, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the
effectiveness of the Fund's internal control over financial reporting.
Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the Fund's
internal control over financial reporting.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and maintaining
effective internal control over financial reporting.  In fulfilling this
responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to
assess the expected benefits and related costs of controls.  A fund's
internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles.  A fund's internal control over
financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1)
pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately
and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
fund; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as
necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures
of the fund are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and trustees of the fund; and (3)  provide reasonable assurance
regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or
disposition of a fund's assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial
reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.  Also, projections
of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the
risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions,
or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may
deteriorate.

A deficiency in internal control over financial reporting exists when the
design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees,
in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent
or detect misstatements on a timely basis.  A material weakness is a
deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over
financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a
material misstatement of the Fund's annual or interim financial statements
will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

Our consideration of the Fund's internal control over financial reporting
was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph and would not
necessarily disclose all deficiencies in internal control over financial
reporting that might be material weaknesses under standards established by
the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  However, we
noted no deficiencies in the Fund's internal control over financial reporting
and its operation, including controls over safeguarding securities, that we
consider to be material weaknesses as defined above as of July 31, 2011.







This report is intended solely for the information and use of management and
the Board of Trustees of the Funds and the Securities and Exchange Commission
and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these
specified parties.




/s/PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Boston, Massachusetts
September 20, 2011



Item 77E - Legal Proceedings:

Information Regarding Pending and Settled
Legal Proceedings


In June 2004, an action captioned John E. Gallus et al. v. American
Express Financial Corp. and American Express Financial Advisors
Inc. was filed in the United States District Court for the District of
Arizona. The plaintiffs allege that they are investors in several
American Express Company mutual funds (branded as Columbia or
RiverSource) and they purport to bring the action derivatively on
behalf of those funds under the Investment Company Act of 1940.
The plaintiffs allege that fees allegedly paid to the defendants by the
funds for investment advisory and administrative services are
excessive. The plaintiffs seek remedies including restitution and
rescission of investment advisory and distribution agreements. The
plaintiffs voluntarily agreed to transfer this case to the United States
District Court for the District of Minnesota (the District Court). In
response to defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint, the District
Court dismissed one of plaintiffs' four claims and granted plaintiffs
limited discovery. Defendants moved for summary judgment in
April 2007. Summary judgment was granted in the defendants' favor
on July 9, 2007. The plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals (the Eighth Circuit) on August 8,
2007. On April 8, 2009, the Eighth Circuit reversed summary
judgment and remanded to the District Court for further
proceedings. On August 6, 2009, defendants filed a writ of certiorari
with the U.S. Supreme Court (the Supreme Court), asking the
Supreme Court to stay the District Court proceedings while the
Supreme Court considers and rules in a case captioned Jones v.
Harris Associates, which involves issues of law similar to those
presented in the Gallus case. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court
issued its ruling in Jones v. Harris Associates, and on April 5, 2010,
the Supreme Court vacated the Eighth Circuit's decision in the
Gallus case and remanded the case to the Eighth Circuit for further
consideration in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Jones v.
Harris Associates. On June 4, 2010, the Eighth Circuit remanded the
Gallus case to the District Court for further consideration in light of
the Supreme Court's decision in Jones v. Harris Associates. On
December 9, 2010, the District Court reinstated its July 9, 2007,
summary judgment order in favor of the defendants. On January 10,
2011, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the Eighth Circuit. In
response to the plaintiffs' opening appellate brief filed on March 18,
2011, the defendants filed a response brief on May 4, 2011 with the
Eighth Circuit. The plaintiffs filed a reply brief on May 26, 2011.

In December 2005, without admitting or denying the allegations,
American Express Financial Corporation (AEFC, which is now
known as Ameriprise Financial, Inc. (Ameriprise Financial)), entered
into settlement agreements with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) and Minnesota Department of Commerce
(MDOC) related to market timing activities. As a result, AEFC was
censured and ordered to cease and desist from committing or causing
any violations of certain provisions of the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940, the Investment Company Act of 1940, and various
Minnesota laws. AEFC agreed to pay disgorgement of $10 million
and civil money penalties of $7 million. AEFC also agreed to retain
an independent distribution consultant to assist in developing a plan
for distribution of all disgorgement and civil penalties ordered by the
SEC in accordance with various undertakings detailed at
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/ia-2451.pdf. Ameriprise
Financial and its affiliates have cooperated with the SEC and the
MDOC in these legal proceedings, and have made regular reports to
the funds' Boards of Directors/Trustees.

Ameriprise Financial and certain of its affiliates have historically
been involved in a number of legal, arbitration and regulatory
proceedings, including routine litigation, class actions, and
governmental actions, concerning matters arising in connection with
the conduct of their business activities. Ameriprise Financial believes
that the Funds are not currently the subject of, and that neither
Ameriprise Financial nor any of its affiliates are the subject of, any
pending legal, arbitration or regulatory proceedings that are likely to
have a material adverse effect on the Funds or the ability of
Ameriprise Financial or its affiliates to perform under their contracts
with the Funds. Ameriprise Financial is required to make 10-Q, 10-K
and, as necessary, 8-K filings with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on legal and regulatory matters that relate to Ameriprise
Financial and its affiliates. Copies of these filings may be obtained
by accessing the SEC website at www.sec.gov.

There can be no assurance that these matters, or the adverse publicity
associated with them, will not result in increased fund redemptions,
reduced sale of fund shares or other adverse consequences to the
Funds. Further, although we believe proceedings are not likely to
have a material adverse effect on the Funds or the ability of
Ameriprise Financial or its affiliates to perform under their contracts
with the Funds, these proceedings are subject to uncertainties and, as
such, we are unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss that
may result. An adverse outcome in one or more of these proceedings
could result in adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties or
other relief that could have a material adverse effect on the
consolidated financial condition or results of operations of
Ameriprise Financial.