FOIA Response to AFI 10-206 | Freedom of Information Act | Forum

A A A
Avatar

Please consider registering
Guest

Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

Register Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_TopicIcon
FOIA Response to AFI 10-206
Avatar
magonia17
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 187
Member Since:
December 2, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
October 25, 2013 - 7:21 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

I received a response to my FOIA request dated July 23 2013. I asked for "any records that were reported, filed, processed, created under the preview of AFI 10-206 dated October 15th 2008, Section 5.6, Reporting Instructions".

HQAF response was interesting. They stated: A3, Operations, Plans and Requirements conducted an appropriate search for responsive records, but they stated "none were found". A3 indicated no reports were ever transmitted to HQ AF, under this instruction. They further stated when this Instruction was rewritten on the 6th September 2011, the CIRVIS report was deleted because NORAD no longer required the report.

Avatar
blackvault
Admin
Forum Posts: 1779
Member Since:
August 26, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
October 25, 2013 - 3:25 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Yeah, I found myself entangled on why that was re-written. Have you seen this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/1 ... 82128.html

-----
John Greenewald, Jr.
The Black Vault Website Owner / Operator
http://www.theblackvault.com

Avatar
magonia17
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 187
Member Since:
December 2, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
October 26, 2013 - 3:40 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Yes I have read their account. It does seem strange that it was removed after the article was written, you would of thought once NORAD informed the USAF that it not longer requires CIRVIS reports, the AF would of removed that section completely as soon as it was informed.

Avatar
blackvault
Admin
Forum Posts: 1779
Member Since:
August 26, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
October 26, 2013 - 4:22 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

I was the one that brought it to the Huffington Post's attention when he was doing a write up on The Black Vault.

The short of it, and this wasn't really in the article, is I was able to prove that NORAD "never" had an interest in CIRVIS reports EVER. They told me in a signed letter they didn't have a single report. Yet, the Canadian government sent me a ton of them. The CIRVIS reports I got (small batch of what is really being archived) is at: http://www.theblackvault.com/m/articles ... mvP5fn_nzY

-----
John Greenewald, Jr.
The Black Vault Website Owner / Operator
http://www.theblackvault.com

Avatar
magonia17
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 187
Member Since:
December 2, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
October 26, 2013 - 5:48 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

"blackvault" wrote: I was the one that brought it to the Huffington Post's attention when he was doing a write up on The Black Vault.

The short of it, and this wasn't really in the article, is I was able to prove that NORAD "never" had an interest in CIRVIS reports EVER. They told me in a signed letter they didn't have a single report. Yet, the Canadian government sent me a ton of them. The CIRVIS reports I got (small batch of what is really being archived) is at: http://www.theblackvault.com/m/articles ... mvP5fn_nzY

That's very interesting the US doesn't have any interest, but Canada does. Its like UTR not under the control of USNORTHCOM, thus no records exist but under the preview of NORAD. Tricks of the trade as I call it. NORAD is a strange entity in itself.

Avatar
magonia17
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 187
Member Since:
December 2, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
October 29, 2013 - 5:52 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

I also filed a FOIA to USAFEUROPE, for records they may of created as a result of their version of this Instruction dated 14 September 2009. The response was one day after I filed the request via email. Again a "no records" response. Strange how quickly they responded to my request, they stated they conducted a search, if that was the case it was within record time.

Avatar
magonia17
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 187
Member Since:
December 2, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
February 5, 2014 - 9:07 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Well a response came from the USAF and a no records determination was there answer and they stated this also: "A definite answer as to why CIRVIS was removed from AFI 10-206 is unknown" and then a possible explanation which was " the most likely reason is the requirement was no longer needed or relevant. Therefore, a "no records" determination is made."

Well no documents were found no authorisation documentation, was it just some one decided to remove the section with no authority?

Avatar
magonia17
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 187
Member Since:
December 2, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
8
April 20, 2014 - 3:44 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

"blackvault" wrote: I was the one that brought it to the Huffington Post's attention when he was doing a write up on The Black Vault.

The short of it, and this wasn't really in the article, is I was able to prove that NORAD "never" had an interest in CIRVIS reports EVER. They told me in a signed letter they didn't have a single report. Yet, the Canadian government sent me a ton of them. The CIRVIS reports I got (small batch of what is really being archived) is at: http://www.theblackvault.com/m/articles ... mvP5fn_nzY

According to the internal correspondence from the USAF records from the CIRVIS reporting system are set to NORAD so this contradicts the letter you mentioned.

Avatar
magonia17
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 187
Member Since:
December 2, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
9
May 6, 2014 - 7:00 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Finally I have received the response to my appeal from the USAF regarding the missing portions pertaining to CIRVIS, they stated the following:

" Your appeal was routed to the initial denying office (AF/A3/5) for review and coordination. AF/A3 has completed their review, after a further search, the attached spread sheets provides "Comment line item 244, from A3O-AOA, recommended that the CIRVIS requirement be deleted because CIRVIS was no longer used."

The spread sheet provides the following under the following:

Comment

Remove non-1C3 AFSC reporting items
not required by CJCS or CSAF. Reports
including REPOL, MEDREP, CIRVIS
are reports owned by Logistics, Medical,
and NORTHCOM respectively and do
not involve 1C3 action or CJCS or CSAF
notification. CIRVIS in particular is no
longer required.

Rationale

The valid reporting processes need to be
absorbed by their functional areas
(Logistics and Medical). CIRVIS no
longer exists.

Why CIRVIS was it no longer required is another matter.

Avatar
magonia17
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 187
Member Since:
December 2, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
10
July 21, 2015 - 11:58 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

I have received a reply from the USAF HQ which states that AF/A3 has responded with a "no records" concerning the for the time period or date the transmission of the reports were stopped vie the CIRVIS system which was a part of AF 10-206 Operational Reports. My request has been forwarded to Air Force Civil Engineer Center in Lackland Texas. This is a subordinate unit of the Air Material Command and does provide amongst other things operations support.

Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles

Most Users Ever Online: 288

Currently Online:
24 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

greeney2: 10044

bionic: 9877

at1with0: 9242

Lashmar: 5757

tigger: 4576

rath: 4332

DIss0n80r: 4161

sandra: 3858

frrostedman: 3815

Wing-Zero: 3283

Newest Members:

viljqnBQ

MartinTemVX

arjydnHT

fuckingaliensgotmeagain

dev1229

Howard Brand

mrm77yBQ

ViviantrifeYR

Rodney Moorhead

Xavier Cheyne

Forum Stats:

Groups: 8

Forums: 31

Topics: 8161

Posts: 121454

 

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 2

Members: 19669

Moderators: 0

Admins: 2

Administrators: John Greenewald, blackvault