The archive, now available through The Black Vault’s custom-built search engine platform, includes searchable PDFs, videos, images, transcripts, and supporting records connected to the Department of War’s Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) document release last week.

The original release presented several challenges for researchers and the public alike. Many of the PDF files were password protected, limiting accessibility and preventing standard optical character recognition (OCR) processing. Numerous files were also either poorly searchable or entirely unsearchable in their original form.

To address those issues, The Black Vault processed the files into a more usable format wherever possible. Password restrictions were removed when necessary to allow OCR processing, and searchable text was generated from the documents to improve discoverability across the archive. While OCR quality varies depending on the condition and quality of the original files, every effort was made to maximize searchability and functionality.

The search engine was designed with simplicity and utility in mind. Rather than focusing on excessive visual effects, unnecessary statistics, or overly complicated interfaces, the platform emphasizes speed, organization, and direct access to the underlying records. Users can search document text, titles, agencies, locations, filenames, and related metadata through a streamlined interface intended to support both casual readers and serious researchers.

The archive currently contains:

• Searchable government PDF documents
• Video records associated with the release
• OCR-generated text files
• Transcript and subtitle support for available videos
• Agency categorization
• Related-record linking
• Direct PDF highlighting support

The Black Vault also offers the entire processed UFO Files Release #1 collection as a downloadable ZIP archive for researchers who wish to work with the files offline.

As additional UFO/UAP records are released publicly, the archive will continue to expand. Future releases will be processed and integrated into the search engine as they become available, with ongoing improvements planned for metadata, transcripts, OCR quality, and organizational tools.

The UFO Files Release #1 Search Engine can be accessed here:

The bulk 2.0GB downloadable archive is available here:

https://documents3.theblackvault.com/documents/UFOFiles/UFOFiles-Release1.zip

###

The post The Black Vault Launches Searchable UFO Files Release Archive first appeared on The Black Vault.

The request was submitted on June 1, 2009, and sought a specific Cold War-era report related to anti-satellite weapons policy. The filing requested:

“a copy of document entitled Analysis and Perspectives on ASAT Arms Control, report number AAC-TR-19501/81, dated December, 1981, with AD Number C951399.”

According to the final response issued by the Department of Defense, the request was received by the Office of the Secretary of War/Joint Staff FOIA Requester Service Center on July 1, 2009. The agency’s closing letter, dated May 5, 2026, formally ended the case. No processing timeline, interim correspondence, or explanation for the length of time between submission and final response is included in the released documents.

Despite the extended duration, the agency confirmed that records were located, which totaled 80 pages.

Those 80 pages, however, were withheld in full. The determination cites multiple exemptions under 5 U.S.C. § 552, including classified national security information, intelligence sources and methods, weapons-related data, diplomatic sensitivities, and vulnerabilities tied to national defense systems. The response specifies that the material remains classified under Executive Order 13526 and references statutory protections including 50 U.S.C. § 3024(h) and provisions of the Atomic Energy Act.

The denial was issued with input from multiple offices and officials across defense and intelligence agencies, including personnel associated with nuclear deterrence policy, DARPA, the Joint Staff, the Department of State, and the Defense Intelligence Agency, each acting in a capacity as an Initial Denial Authority. The breadth of involvement reflects the sensitivity attributed to the subject matter of the requested report.

The agency further stated that it applied the “foreseeable harm standard” in reviewing the records, concluding that release would pose risks to national security and related interests. No portions of the document were released in redacted form, and no segregable material was identified for disclosure.

The response letter formally closed the case and advised of the right to appeal within 90 days.

The case represents a rare example of a FOIA request spanning nearly two decades from submission to final determination. While the existence of responsive records was confirmed, the complete withholding of all 80 pages leaves the contents of the requested 1981 report undisclosed. The available documentation does not provide further detail on the report’s substance beyond its title and classification status.

The Black Vault has filed an appeal, along with filed a request to see the FOIA case processing notes and correspondence (beyond that with this article’s author) generated during the request. Those results will be posted, when available.

###

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [345.19 KB]

The post 17-Year FOIA Request Ends With Total Withholding, Marking Longest Case in The Black Vault’s History first appeared on The Black Vault.

A newly released Freedom of Information Act response from NASA reveals internal discussions focused on how the agency would communicate a confirmed discovery of extraterrestrial life.

This includes details about a 2025 meeting convened to outline a formal communications protocol.

The records stem from a request seeking documents related to “agency-level planning, policy, or procedural guidance addressing the detection, reporting, analysis, or response to the discovery of extraterrestrial intelligence, extraterrestrial life, or non-terrestrial technological signals.”

2025 Meeting Focused on “Definitive Discovery of ET Life”

Central to the release is a June 2025 Microsoft Teams meeting invitation and related email correspondence documenting a discussion among NASA personnel and affiliated participants.

The purpose of the meeting is described directly in the invitation:

“This is a meeting to work with Linda to develop ideas toward rough outlining of how an official communications protocol for a definitive discovery of ET life might look…”

The same communication indicates the effort was not new, referencing prior internal work:

“I’ll send around some materials/thoughts Mary, Jim Green, and I developed awhile back on this.”

The participants include individuals associated with NASA’s science mission and astrobiology communications efforts, including David H. Grinspoon and Linda Billings, both of whom have longstanding roles in public engagement and the societal implications of astrobiology research.

Earlier Framework Predates Recent Discussions

Supporting materials included in the release show that NASA’s work on extraterrestrial discovery communications extends back several years. A presentation titled “Discovery of Extraterrestrial Life Communications Protocol Development,” dated July 29, 2020, outlines foundational considerations for such a scenario.

That document emphasizes that any discovery could vary significantly in nature:

“Factors about the detection/discovery may occur along a spectrum: Location: near (in our Solar System) far (exoplanets) Organism: microbial humanoid Biosignature: chemical/molecular ‘traditional’ fossil”

It also highlights the dual challenge of scientific validation and public communication, stating:

“Differences in socioeconomics, race, gender, education level, culture, faith, etc.”

“Ensure all have accurate information and support to make meaning of it”

“Cultivate a culture of celebration vs. fear”

The opening line of this section places immediate emphasis on how unevenly a discovery of extraterrestrial life could be received across society. By explicitly listing “differences in socioeconomics, race, gender, education level, culture, faith, etc.,” the document acknowledges that public interpretation would not be uniform, but shaped by deeply rooted social and cultural frameworks. The guidance that follows reinforces NASA’s role not simply as a source of scientific data, but as a communicator responsible for ensuring that “all have accurate information and support to make meaning of it,” coupled with an intentional effort to “cultivate a culture of celebration vs. fear.”

Taken together, this section reflects a deliberate focus on managing societal reaction as much as conveying scientific findings, with the underlying premise that public response itself would be a critical component of any confirmed discovery.

Defined Role for NASA in a Discovery Scenario

The documents outline how NASA views its role in the event of such a discovery, emphasizing information dissemination and public engagement.

According to the presentation:

“The provision of accurate scientific information in an equitable way”

“Access to scientific expertise”

“Encouragement of healthy conversation and dialogue”

The agency also describes itself as playing a broader societal role:

“Facilitators in a co-creative, meaning-making process across diverse communities”

Redactions Limit Visibility Into Final Protocol

Portions of the material remain withheld under FOIA Exemption 5. NASA states this exemption applies to “draft documents, analyses, recommendations and/or opinions expressed by employees,” which are part of internal deliberations.

A slide labeled “Initial Guidance to Develop the Protocol” contains multiple redactions, obscuring specific recommendations and elements of the proposed communications approach.

Timing Relative to UAP Activity and Public Interest

The June 2025 meeting occurred after a period of sustained public and governmental focus on unidentified anomalous phenomena. In 2023, NASA released the findings of its independent UAP study team, which examined how the agency could contribute to understanding unidentified objects observed in air and space. That study concluded prior to the timeframe of the 2025 communications planning documented in this release.

The records released through this FOIA request do not reference UAP, nor do they connect the communications planning effort to any specific UAP investigation or conclusion.

However, the timing places the renewed discussion within a broader environment of increased attention to anomalous phenomena, congressional hearings, and ongoing public speculation about the possibility of future disclosures related to non-human intelligence. It should also be noted that Dr. Grinspoon was a member of NASA’s UAP study effort.

What the Documents Establish

The records confirm that NASA personnel revisited and actively discussed how to communicate a confirmed discovery of extraterrestrial life as recently as June 2025, building on earlier work conducted within the NASA Astrobiology Program.

The documents do not indicate that any such discovery has occurred, nor do they outline a finalized or approved communications protocol. Significant portions of the deliberative process remain redacted, and no operational plan is fully disclosed.

The Black Vault has filed an appeal fighting the (b)(5) redactions which completely shield the “Initial Guidance to Develop the Protocol” slide. Those results will be posted, when available.

###

Document Archive

26-00374-F-HQ Release Package [17 Pages, 1.4MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.68 MB]

The post NASA Documents Show Renewed Internal Planning on How to Announce Discovery of Extraterrestrial Life first appeared on The Black Vault.

The post Newly Released Documents Show UAP “Space Tiger Team” Built Around Space and Transmedium Cases first appeared on The Black Vault.

A newly released series of Pentagon emails from May 2019 reveals an internal contradiction at the center of the Department of Defense’s narrative on the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) and Luis Elizondo.

At the center of the records is a May 7, 2019, email from senior Pentagon official Neill Tipton, former Director of Defense Intelligence for Collection and Special Programs, which states in clear terms that Elizondo “had no assigned responsibilities” related to AATIP during his time under Tipton within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD).

Yet the same batch of emails, along with previously released records published by The Black Vault as released via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), shows Tipton was directly communicating with Elizondo about AATIP, reviewing a memo to assume responsibilities tied to it, and participating in internal discussions about how the Department should respond to inquiries on the subject.

The newly uncovered email chain also shows that Tipton’s statement did not stand uncontested internally. Instead, it prompted immediate concern among Pentagon officials about contradictions, prior statements, and the need to keep messaging consistent.

Tipton’s Core Statement

In the May 7, 2019, email, Tipton wrote:

“Elizondo had no assigned responsibilities for this program… Elizondo worked for me from 2010 to early 2012.”

He added:

“At the time he was assigned to me, he brought with him no responsibilities for AATIP (and I was unaware of its existence).”

The language is precise and limited in scope, focusing specifically on Elizondo’s time under Tipton within OSD.

Immediate Internal Reaction

A follow-up email sent later that day by an individuals name that was redacted reflects concern about how the statement could be interpreted:

“Neill raises an important issue here—the Department may be putting itself in an awkward position of both contradicting previous ‘statements’ (however they may have been misconstrued) and potential statements from Senator Reid…”

The message continues:

“As for other, more recent history, I am happy to discuss in person or in another venue/media.”

This indicates that additional context existed but was not being fully revealed in the written response. It also suggests that further discussion was being moved to another setting, outside the documented email exchange, which would limit what is preserved in the official record and subject to a future FOIA disclosure.

Defining the Scope of the Pentagon’s Answer

Another email in the chain further clarifies the Department’s internal reasoning:

“The issue for us… is that when we answer, we’re answering for all of DoD, for all of Elizondo’s time in DoD, not just his time in OUSD(I).”

It continues:

“So while he may not have had any assigned responsibilities for these programs while in OUSD(I), if he did work on these programs while assigned to a different DoD organization… we have to confirm that—or confirm that he didn’t work on them at any time while assigned to DoD, whichever is true.”

This internal discussion highlights why the Pentagon’s statement was narrowly framed. It addressed only a specific period and organizational context, rather than Elizondo’s entire time within the Department of Defense. What remains unclear is why the broader context was not included, particularly given the existence of other documented exchanges. Whether additional information influenced how the statement was constructed is not addressed in the available records.

Messaging Coordination

By May 8, 2019, the email chain shows awareness that the issue extended beyond a single response:

“I was asked this afternoon to discuss a FOIA issue which I can only imagine is related to this… we will have to keep our messages in synch.”

That same email introduces an important distinction:

“There is also a distinction to be made between old, wound-down programs and normal coordination/facilitation within DoD and the IC…”

This suggests that internally, officials were grappling with how to define AATIP itself, Elizondo’s role, if any, and how to respond to the public in a unified, synchronized, way.

Documented Exchanges With Elizondo

The significance of these internal discussions becomes clearer when compared to previously released records obtained by The Black Vault.

In a September 25, 2017, email, Elizondo wrote to Tipton:

“Per SECDEF’s Front Office guidance to you and me, I took the liberty of drafting a memo… that helps you better assume the new responsibilities for AATIP.”

Tipton responded days later:

“Getting spun back up. Will read and get thoughts back today or tomorrow…”

These exchanges show that Tipton and Elizondo were in direct communication about AATIP, including a draft memorandum outlining responsibilities.

Those exchanges are not referenced in Tipton’s May 7, 2019, email.

The omission is notable because it shows that Tipton was, at minimum, aware of AATIP discussions and had been directly engaged in communications about it.

It should also be noted that efforts by The Black Vault to confirm direct communication between Neill Tipton and Luis Elizondo regarding AATIP responsibilities were neither immediate nor straightforward. The process began with FOIA case 21-F-0964, filed on May 5, 2021, which specifically sought emails between the two officials containing terms such as “AATIP,” “UAP,” and related keywords. Despite the targeted nature of the request, the Department of Defense responded on December 14, 2021, stating that “no records” were found. This response stood in direct conflict with prior research and information indicating that such communications did, in fact, exist.

In response, The Black Vault filed an appeal within one day, citing a specific known email dated September 25, 2017, in which Elizondo contacted Tipton and referenced AATIP directly. That appeal argued that “this fact alone should have yielded at least one responsive document,” and challenged the adequacy of the search conducted. The appeal was ultimately granted in February 2022, forcing the case to be remanded for further processing. However, even after the appeal was approved, procedural issues persisted, including the Department of Defense failing to acknowledge the reopened case until August 2023, which it later stated had been “overlooked.”

When records were eventually produced under the remanded case (21-FR-0964), they confirmed that responsive communications did exist. However, even within those records, key details were initially obscured. In a related FOIA production (case 21-F-1154), portions of the same email chain had previously been released with critical language redacted, including the specific reference to “AATIP” in the context of transferring responsibilities. Only after continued pressure and the appeal process did the unredacted version reveal that Elizondo had written to Tipton that he had drafted a memo “that helps [Tipton] better assume the new responsibilities for AATIP.” This progression from “no records,” to partially redacted records, to eventual disclosure… demonstrates the extent to which confirming even basic facts about these exchanges required sustained effort and formal challenge through the FOIA process.

This does not establish that Elizondo formally led AATIP. It also does not confirm the exact structure or status of the program within the Department of Defense.

However, it does demonstrate that AATIP was being discussed between Tipton and Elizondo, including a transfer of responsibilities, which was not reflected in the 2019 internal conversation that led to the public statement. Tipton emphasized that he was “unaware of AATIP’s existence,” a statement tied to an earlier period when Elizondo worked under him. Yet documented emails from 2017 show Tipton was later engaged in direct discussions about AATIP, raising questions about why that context was not included in his 2019 account.

Speculation on What Was Left Unsaid

It is not explained in the documents why this context was omitted. If AATIP was considered an informal effort, a limited initiative, or a responsibility outside formal assignment structures, that context could have been articulated within the public statement to provide greater clarity.

Similarly, if AATIP was viewed as a minor or secondary activity, that distinction could have been conveyed using established Pentagon terminology, as well.

However, the absence of any reference to documented exchanges between Tipton and Elizondo adds to the existing uncertainty and raises additional questions that are not addressed in the available records, nor is any of it addressed in any official statements by the Pentagon.

Statement From Luis Elizondo

Luis Elizondo, in a statement provided to The Black Vault for this article, disputes Tipton’s characterization and asserts that the documentary record reflects a different reality.

Elizondo stated:

“There exists several emails and documents that illustrate as a matter of fact that Neill not only knew about my involvement in AATIP, but that he had agreed to replace me and assume my responsibilities.

It’s disappointing to see senior leaders outwardly lie to their chain of command to save their own butts, but given Neill’s new role at the time, and the massive witch hunt Garry Reid had initiated to tear me down and erase me, I understand why Neil wrote what he did. But it still does not make it right.

There are numerous witnesses that also briefed Neil WITH ME present. I think this email by Neill proves once and for all how they attempted to change the narrative. However, I sure wish someone would ask him the same question under oath. I guarantee to you his statement would not be the same if he knows the consequences for lying.

This is yet another example of the tremendously unjust efforts by my former leadership to try and cover their butts while throwing me to the wolves. I am relieved that people are now seeing the truth for what it really is.

AATIP was real, I was the senior ranking official, and since my departure the Pentagon has tried every way to change the narrative. It’s shameful but I am not the last bit surprised; business as usual I guess…and they wonder why our citizens have lost all faith and confidence at the Pentagon. If Hegseth were to read this, I sure hope he would fire some people.”

These claims are presented as Elizondo’s position and are not independently and/or fully verified within the scope of the released documents. Elizondo’s comments are published here, in full, and unedited.

Neill Tipton did not respond to a request for comment.

A Record Still Taking Shape, Nearly 10 Years Later

The May 2019 email chain does not resolve the longstanding questions surrounding AATIP or Elizondo’s role. It does not confirm that Elizondo led a formal program, nor does it define the full scope or structure of AATIP.

What it does show is that Pentagon officials were actively discussing how to respond, how to align messaging, and how to avoid potential contradictions.

It also shows that known communications between key individuals were not reflected in at least one official internal explanation that led to the DoD’s publish statements about Elizondo and AATIP.

Whether that omission reflects incomplete knowledge, narrow framing, or other factors is not addressed in the available record, thus far.

As additional documents continue to emerge, the historical record surrounding AATIP and the roles of those involved remains incomplete and continues to evolve.

The Black Vault has numerous outstanding FOIA requests on this specific issue, many of which have been pending for more than six years, which may yield additional records that further clarify these unresolved questions.

The full batch of 400+ pages of records containing the above email thread is currently under appeal, as The Black Vault is challenging the extensive redactions in key portions of the conversations. The outcome of that appeal will be reported when available.

###

Document Archive

 20-F-0163 Full Release Package [418 Pages, 17MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [16.84 MB]

The post New Emails Reveal Pentagon Effort to Align Messaging on AATIP and Luis Elizondo first appeared on The Black Vault.

A newly released collection of Department of Defense records centers on internal email communications tied to Pentagon spokesperson Christopher Sherwood and references to Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP). The material stems from a targeted Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking insight into how UAP-related terminology and issues were discussed within the Pentagon’s public affairs apparatus.

The request specifically sought “a copy of all emails, sent to and/or from (bcc’d and cc’d) Pentagon spokesman Christopher Sherwood… with the following keywords/phrases,” including “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena,” “Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon,” “UAP,” and “UAPs” . The scope was narrowly defined, focusing on a single individual and a set of keywords that became increasingly prominent within Department of Defense communications in the late 2010s. Sherwood primarily responded to UAP related questions from the media, even those from The Black Vault, back around this time frame. He was later replaced in those duties by Susan Gough, for reasons unknown.

Sherwood served as a Pentagon spokesperson within the Department of Defense’s public affairs structure. In that role, communications involving Sherwood typically relate to media inquiries, official messaging, and coordination of public statements on defense-related topics.

According to the Department of Defense response, a search conducted by the Office of the Assistant to the Secretary of War for Public Affairs located “416 pages determined to be responsive” to the request . These records were reviewed by multiple entities across the defense and intelligence community, including the

Defense Intelligence Agency, Office of General Counsel, and the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General .

Portions of the material were withheld under several FOIA exemptions, including protections for intelligence-related information, internal deliberations, and personal privacy. Specifically, the Department cited exemptions covering “information pertaining to… the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Reconnaissance Office, and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency,” as well as “inter- and intra-agency memoranda… contain[ing]subjective evaluations, opinions and recommendations” .

This overview serves as an introduction to the archive. Subsequent analysis will examine the emails in detail, including their chronology, participants, and substantive content. For now, the entire archive is below.

An appeal was filed by The Black Vault to argue the extensive redactions.

###

Document Archive

20-F-0163 Release Package [418 Pages, 17MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [16.84 MB]

 

The post Pentagon Spokesperson Christopher Sherwood Emails on UFOs, UAP, and more first appeared on The Black Vault.

One FBI report dated June 11, 1984 states:

“At approximately 1:55 a.m., April 20, 1984, an improvised explosive device detonated in the reception area of Building 101, the Officers’ Club, Washington Navy Yard, Washington, D.C.”

The same report notes:

“The building was unoccupied at the time, and there were no injuries.”

The investigation was opened under federal jurisdiction due to the use of an explosive device and the possibility of involvement by “terrorist or revolutionary groups.”

Claims of Responsibility

The file documents multiple communications claiming responsibility for the bombing. According to FBI reporting:

“Shortly after the blast, two calls were received; one each at the Washington Post newspaper and the United Press International which claimed responsibility for the bombing.”

One call relayed a recorded message:

“The caller stated that there had been a bombing at the Washington Navy Yard… in support of independence for Puerto Rico… [and]that the FALN was claiming responsibility.”

A separate message referenced a different group:

“The tape recorded message stated something to the effect that the Guerrilla Resistance Movement… bombed the Washington Navy Yard… against United States imperialism in the Caribbean and Central America.”

Mailed Communiqués

The FBI file includes extensive documentation of letters believed to be associated with the group “Red Guerrilla Resistance.” These letters were mailed to various organizations and media outlets and often traced back to the same return address.

An April 30, 1984 interview states:

“She received… pieces of mail, believed to be RED GUERRILLA RESISTANCE communiques, claiming responsibility for the bombing of the WASHINGTON NAVY YARD (WNY) Officers’ Club on April 20, 1984.”

Multiple envelopes were sent to organizations including media outlets and advocacy groups, with a recurring return address:

“840 Barnaby Street, S.E., Apartment #23, Washington, D.C. 20032.”

However, the file notes a key inconsistency:

“There is no apartment #23 at 840 Barnaby Street, S.E., Washington, D.C.”

Additional records show repeated receipt of returned mail bearing the same address, reinforcing its use across multiple communications.

Witness Interviews and Leads

The file contains numerous witness interviews from employees and patrons present at the Officers’ Club prior to the bombing. These include descriptions of unidentified individuals (“Unsubs”) and composite sketches generated during the investigation.

One interview describes a suspicious individual observed the night before the explosion:

“This individual seemed to be deep in thought, gave the appearance of being unfriendly and appeared as though he might be waiting for someone else to arrive.”

Despite these efforts, the investigation encountered significant limitations. A summary states:

“Completed leads to date have met with very limited success and have not identified the perpetrators of the bombing.”

Investigative Scope and Coordination

The case involved coordination between multiple agencies, including:

“The Metropolitan Police Department, United States Secret Service, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, and Naval District of Washington Police.”

The FBI also worked jointly with the Naval Investigative Service (NIS), issuing a unified report to avoid duplication of investigative efforts.

Status Reflected in the File

The documents indicate that, at the time of reporting, the case remained unresolved. The identity of those responsible for the bombing was not determined within the materials released, and investigative leads had not produced definitive results.

Redactions are present throughout the file, particularly in names, identifying details, and portions of investigative analysis, limiting full visibility into certain aspects of the case.

The full release can be seen below.

###

Document Archive

FBI Released Files [190 Pages, 15.1MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [15.49 MB]

The post Newly Released FBI File Details 1984 Washington Navy Yard Bombing Investigation first appeared on The Black Vault.

In an unprecedented revelation, The Black Vault was the first to report that the Department of Defense (DoD) had destroyed Elizondo’s emails, a move that surprised many and intensified the scrutiny surrounding the government’s handling of this sensitive subject. It also hindered efforts to verify many of Elizondo’s claims, with the use of what would likely reside in these emails. Therefore, this presented a significant barrier to the standard Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) process while investigating his claims.

Yet, where one door closed, another opened.

Recognizing that communication is a two-way process, The Black Vault initiated a strategic approach. By targeting FOIA requests on the email archives of DoD personnel who had likely corresponded with Elizondo, it was possible to indirectly recover portions of Elizondo’s email exchanges. This indirect method, albeit unorthodox, proved to be a way to shed light on conversations that would have otherwise remained obscured.

The archive below, which is still being added to due to the fact that numerous FOIA requests are still open, is a collection of emails offering a glimpse into the world of Luis Elizondo and his interactions within the Department of Defense. In addition, it also logs those that may have communicated with Elizondo, but according to the FOIA final response, ‘no records’ were found. That is archived here as the inability to find records can be used to fact check claims in the past made.

Document Archive

Records Released Archive:

Name Withheld [10 Pages, 1MB] – The Black Vault has opted to keep the identity of this particular person anonymous. The name, discovered by The Black Vault, was one that the DoD aimed to not reveal in the FOIA release, and the DoD opted to remove the name in their FOIA case logs that referenced The Black Vault’s request. As a courtesy, and in the interest in privacy, the name is withheld. However, the documents are here for research and reference. This person was likely a subordinate who, as you can see from the emails, did various tasks for Elizondo. Notably, this was the person that got DOPSR’s email address that Elizondo utilized to coordinate a review of the FLIR, Gimbal and GoFast videos for use in an internal DoD database.

Marcel Lettre [3 Pages, 1MB] – Marcel Lettre served as the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence at the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) from December 2015 to January 2017. In this role, he was the principal intelligence advisor to the Secretary of Defense. Lettre’s tenure at the DoD intersected with the time frame during which Luis Elizondo claims he was involved with the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP). Given the overlapping periods of their service, a request was filed for communications.

McKernan, Brennan [28 Pages, 0.8MB] – Brennan McKernan is a U.S. Navy intelligence analyst who served as director of the Pentagon’s Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force (UAPTF), the unit responsible for collecting and analyzing military UFO/UAP sightings prior to its replacement by newer offices like AARO. The request, filed by The Black Vault in June of 2021, asked for all communications between McKernan and Elizondo for all dates available.

“No Records” or Other Records Destroyed Archive:

James Clapper [3 Pages, 1MB] – James Clapper served as the U.S. Director of National Intelligence (DNI) from 2010 to 2017, overseeing the country’s 17 intelligence agencies. Before his tenure as DNI, Clapper held various key positions within the U.S. intelligence community, including the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) from 1992 to 1995 and the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence from 2007 to 2010. During Clapper’s time in the Department of Defense (DoD), particularly his stint as the Undersecretary, Luis Elizondo was also affiliated with the DoD, so their paths in the sprawling DoD apparatus may have intersected. A FOIA request which had combined a few names did not yield communications between Elizondo and Clapper. However, above, you will see the release relating to Marcel Lettre, which was in the same combined request as this one.

Mark Sanders [3 Pages, 1MB] – It is likely that Mr. Mark Sanders was the Director of the Foreign Material Program at the time Luis Elizondo stated he briefed him on AATIP, as claimed by Elizondo’s IG complaint, as published by the NY Post. Although the name was redacted, a DoD resource indicates Sanders was likely in that position. A request was filed, but it was determined through the processing of the FOIA case that Sanders’ emails were destroyed after he left the DoD in 2017. Therefore, a “no records” determination was given.

Patrick Shanahan – Patrick Shanahan served as the 33rd Deputy Secretary of Defense from July 2017 until January 2019 and then as the Acting Secretary of Defense from January 2019 to June 2019. Prior to his time in the Pentagon, Shanahan had a distinguished career at Boeing. During his tenure at the Department of Defense (DoD), Luis Elizondo claimed to have headed the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) until he resigned from the DoD in 2017. Given their overlapping time at the Pentagon and the significant attention AATIP and related UAP issues have received, it’s plausible that Shanahan and Elizondo may have had some level of interaction or awareness of each other’s work, however, FOIA case 20-F-0049 showed “no records” were found in regards to communications.

The post Archive of Luis Elizondo’s “Deleted” Emails first appeared on The Black Vault.

The case, labeled as 25-00860-F-HQ, stems from a September 22, 2024, FOIA request seeking “all briefings about the James Webb telescope and program, made for Congress,” including both classified and unclassified material related to discoveries made by the observatory. The request was originally denied with a “no records” determination, a conclusion later overturned on appeal.

As previously reported, NASA ultimately acknowledged that responsive records did exist and released a set of briefing slides in August 2025. However, those materials were almost entirely redacted under FOIA Exemption (b)(5), which protects pre-decisional and deliberative communications within government agencies.

Appeal Results in Limited Additional Disclosure

Following a subsequent appeal challenging those redactions, NASA issued a supplemental response on March 27, 2026, stating that “previously withheld information can now be disclosed” and providing an updated version of the records.

The newly released material primarily affects the “Themes” section of the briefing slides, which had previously been fully withheld. The updated version now reveals a series of high-level talking points prepared for NASA officials ahead of a November 16, 2022, House Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics hearing.

Those themes include:

“Incredible Value of American and International Asset”
“Early Science Points Toward Vast Potential”
“Congress Can and Should Expect Great Results for Its Investments”
“Habitable Worlds Await Our Discovery”
“Our future plans are dependable routes to amazing results”

These statements provide a broad framing of how NASA intended to present JWST’s early scientific achievements and future promise to lawmakers. However, they remain general in nature and do not disclose any specific findings or detailed scientific conclusions.

Continued Reliance on FOIA Exemption (b)(5)

Despite the partial release, the vast majority of the briefing content remains withheld under FOIA Exemption (b)(5). As explained in NASA’s original response letter, this exemption covers “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters” that would not be available in litigation and includes the deliberative process privilege.

NASA further explained that to qualify under this privilege, records must be both “pre-decisional and deliberative,” meaning they were created prior to an agency decision and reflect internal discussions, recommendations, or evaluations.

In this case, the agency argued that the withheld portions consist of internal preparations for a congressional hearing, including “the development of critical questions, evaluations, and proposals.”

The agency also warned that disclosure could inhibit candid internal discussions, stating that if such communications were released, “NASA and other Executive Branch employees would be much more cautious in their discussions with each other,” potentially impairing decision-making processes.

Redactions Persist in “Questions to Think About”

The supplemental release makes clear that while some material was disclosed, most of the document remains unchanged in its level of redaction. Sections titled “Messages?” and multiple pages of “Questions to Think About” continue to be almost entirely blacked out.

Notably, the updated version reveals only minimal fragments within these sections. In several instances, punctuation marks such as question marks are visible, along with a single discernible word: “When?” embedded within an otherwise redacted line.

Context: Public Hearing, Private Preparations

The records at the center of this case were created in preparation for a public congressional hearing held on November 16, 2022, titled “Unfolding the Universe: Initial Science Results from JWST.”

That hearing featured testimony from NASA officials and academic experts and was openly broadcast, with detailed discussions of JWST’s early scientific results. The released slides were prepared internally by NASA’s Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs ahead of that public session.

The existence of preparatory materials for such hearings formed the basis of the original appeal, which argued that it was “highly improbable that no materials… were generated or retained” in connection with a congressional briefing of that scale.

NASA ultimately agreed that additional records existed, leading to the initial release and now the supplemental disclosure.

Ongoing Questions and Broader Context

The FOIA request itself was prompted by widespread online speculation in 2024 suggesting that NASA may have provided classified briefings to Congress about JWST discoveries, including unverified claims of unusual or unexplained findings. While no evidence has emerged from the released records to support those claims, the persistence of heavy redactions adds only more mystery to the saga.

The newly disclosed “Themes” emphasize optimism about JWST’s capabilities and future discoveries, including references to “Habitable Worlds” and “vast potential.” However, the continued withholding of detailed talking points and internal questions leaves unanswered what specific issues NASA anticipated from lawmakers, or how it internally framed those discussions.

While the appeal succeeded in forcing additional disclosure, the result offers only a narrow glimpse into NASA’s internal preparation process for JWST briefings which leaves the majority of that process, and the questions it may have addressed, still out of public view.

###

Document Archive

 FOIA Case 25-00860-F Supplemental Release Package [7 Pages, 2.9MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [2.88 MB]

The post NASA Partially Lifts Redactions in James Webb Briefing Records Following Appeal first appeared on The Black Vault.

Hoover has been credited with building the FBI into a larger crime-fighting agency than it was at its inception and with instituting a number of modernizations to police technology, such as a centralized fingerprint file and forensic laboratories. Hoover is also credited with establishing and expanding a national blacklist, referred to as the FBI Index or Index List, renamed in 2001 as the Terrorist Screening Database which the FBI still compiles and manages.

Document Archive

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Releases

Hoover, J. Edgar – FBI Release #1 – J. Edgar Hoover Files – [573 Pages, 297MB]
Hoover, J. Edgar – FBI Vault Release #1 – J. Edgar Hoover Files – [1,920 Pages, 315MB]
Hoover, J. Edgar – FBI Vault Release #2 – J. Edgar Hoover Appointment and Phone Logs – [3,994 Pages, 1.2GB]
Hoover, J. Edgar – FBI Vault Release #3 – J. Edgar Hoover Official and Confidential (O&C) Files – [1,903 Pages, 59MB]

Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) Releases

Hoover, J. Edgar – NCIS Release #1 [7 Pages, 0.5MB]

Postal Inspection Service (PIS) Releases

Hoover, J. Edgar – PIS Release #1 [21 Pages, 2.1MB]

The post FBI File Collection on J. Edgar Hoover first appeared on The Black Vault.

The estimate provides a comprehensive analysis of how U.S. intelligence officials viewed nuclear proliferation risks during a critical phase of the Cold War. It evaluates which countries possessed the technical, financial, and industrial capabilities to develop nuclear weapons, as well as the strategic motivations that might drive such decisions. The document identifies a group of nations considered capable of pursuing nuclear weapons programs and assesses their relative timelines and likelihood of success, while emphasizing that political and security considerations would ultimately play a greater role than purely technical limitations.

In outlining the broader implications, the estimate concludes that while the spread of nuclear weapons was becoming increasingly feasible due to the wider availability of materials and expertise, it was unlikely to dramatically shift the global balance of power in the near term. Instead, the primary impact would be political and psychological, introducing new uncertainties into international relations, increasing the complexity of alliance structures, and raising the risk that regional conflicts could escalate. The assessment also highlights concerns about accidental detonations, miscalculations, and the pressures that emerging nuclear capabilities could place on both allies and adversaries.

As a historical intelligence product, the re-released estimate offers insight into how U.S. analysts evaluated one of the most pressing strategic issues of the era. The updated version, with reduced redactions, provides a clearer view into those assessments while preserving the document’s original conclusions about the challenges and consequences of nuclear proliferation.

###

Document Archive

MDR Case EOM-2021-00021 Release Package [32 Pages, 4.7MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [4.70 MB]

The post Cold War Nuclear Assessment Re-Released with Fewer Redactions After Five-Year Review first appeared on The Black Vault.

The FOIA request, originally submitted May 30, 2025, sought comprehensive records related to an Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenon (UAP) observed by flight PWA192 during its return trip from San Francisco International Airport (SFO) to Chicago Executive Airport (PWK). The FAA issued a partial denial response under case number FAA-2025-03957, releasing limited material while withholding others under federal exemptions.

The case first came to light through an anonymous tip submitted to The Black Vault. While anonymous sources are typically treated with caution, the details provided were corroborated through FAA documentation and audio recordings released under FOIA.

The most direct official acknowledgment appears in the FAA’s Daily Record of Facility Operation (Form 7230-4), which documents the event as it was recorded in real time by Oakland Air Route Traffic Control Center (ZOA).

At approximately 0210 UTC, the log states:

This entry establishes several key facts: the object was visually observed, it appeared aircraft-like, it maintained a parallel course, and it was not detected on radar systems available to controllers.

Audio transcripts from Oakland Center sectors provide a more detailed and dynamic description of the object as observed by the flight crew and discussed with controllers.

Initial descriptions suggested a “black circle” or object with possible wing-like features. As the encounter progressed, the characterization shifted. At one point, the object was described as resembling “some sort of fighter,” aligning with the wording later used in the FAA’s official log.

The object reportedly maintained position alongside the aircraft for an extended period of approximately 100 miles while pacing the jet at cruise altitude. This sustained proximity is notable, as it implies controlled flight behavior rather than a transient or incidental sighting.

The encounter concluded with the object rapidly ascending and disappearing from view. This abrupt vertical departure was emphasized in the communications, distinguishing the object’s behavior from conventional aircraft operating profiles.

While the FAA log provides a concise summary, the ATC audio reveals a broader range of uncertainty and evolving interpretation among those involved.

The official entry frames the object as “similar to a fighter,” whereas real-time communications included more ambiguous descriptors, including references to unusual shape and unclear configuration. The progression from an undefined “black” object to something potentially resembling a military aircraft highlights how interpretation shifted during the event.

Flight PWA192 is operated by Priester Aviation and utilizes a Gulfstream G150, a twin-engine business jet designed for mid-range operations.

The G150 typically cruises at altitudes up to 45,000 feet and speeds approaching Mach 0.85. Equipped with modern avionics and collision avoidance systems, it is representative of advanced civilian aviation platforms, making its inability to identify the nearby object—visually or electronically—noteworthy.

The FAA withheld radar data under FOIA Exemption 3, citing Sensitive Security Information (SSI).

According to the response letter, “We are withholding in full 12 En Route Automation Modernization radar files because the SSI cannot be segregated.”

The FAA further noted that certain material was withheld under 10 U.S.C. § 130e, which allows for the protection of “sensitive, but unclassified information” where disclosure could reveal vulnerabilities in Department of Defense infrastructure or operations.

However, the only visible redaction within the released Daily Record of Facility Operation appears minimal and tied to an earlier log entry unrelated to the PWA192 incident, referencing navigational aid outages and coded facility status notes. The section documenting the unidentified aircraft encounter at approximately 0210 UTC remains largely intact and unredacted, suggesting the withheld DoD-related information does not directly pertain to the unidentified object.

The log itself provides additional operational context surrounding the event. Routine oversight checks, system certifications (including ADS-B and CPDLC), and periodic pilot report (PIREP) reviews were conducted throughout the shift, with only minor weather-related entries such as turbulence and thunderstorm tops recorded. Just prior to the encounter, a PIREP check logged no significant anomalies beyond light to moderate turbulence, reinforcing that the airspace environment was otherwise stable at the time of the sighting.

The absence of radar data leaves a significant gap, particularly given the FAA log’s explicit statement that no radar targets were observed in the area.

The encounter occurred northeast of Reno, Nevada, which is an area surrounded by multiple military testing and training facilities.

Nearby installations include:

• Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake (California)

• Naval Air Station Fallon (Nevada)

• Tonopah Test Range (Nevada)

• Nellis Air Force Base and the Nevada Test and Training Range

These locations are associated with advanced aviation testing, including classified and stealth aircraft programs. Given this proximity, it remains plausible that the observed object could have been, and maybe is even most likely, a military asset operating under restricted or non-cooperative conditions.

The FAA’s records ultimately categorize the object as unidentified. While the log leans toward an aircraft-like explanation, the lack of radar correlation, the extended pacing behavior, and the rapid vertical departure leave key questions unresolved.

The event also highlights broader aviation safety considerations. Objects operating undetected in controlled airspace, regardless of their origin, present potential risks to civilian aircraft. The inability to identify or track such objects in real time underscores ongoing challenges in airspace awareness and coordination.

The released records provide a rare, document-supported glimpse into such an encounter, capturing both the uncertainty and the operational response as it unfolded.

###

Document Archive

FAA-2025-03957 Release Letter and Incident Report [7 Pages, 1MB]

Audio Archive (Unedited – Right Click, Save As)

PWA192_R43_052025_0130-0245.wav – 140MB

PWR192_R29-32_052025_0130-0245.wav – 140MB

The post FAA Records Detail Pilot Encounter with Unidentified Object Pacing Aircraft Over Nevada first appeared on The Black Vault.

A newly released Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) response from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) provides limited insight into internal communications involving unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), despite a broad request targeting multiple keywords tied to the subject.

The request, submitted on May 23, 2024, sought all emails to, from, or copied to Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm containing terms such as “UAP,” “UFO,” “AARO,” and “Grusch,” among others. It also explicitly requested any associated attachments and directed the agency to search both classified and unclassified systems.

According to the DOE’s final response, the search, which was conducted by the Office of the Secretary, identified just two responsive documents. Both were released in part, with significant portions withheld under multiple FOIA exemptions.

During the course of processing, the scope of the request was amended to exclude news bulletins and later limited the search specifically to emails referencing “Luis” Elizondo vs. just “Elizondo”. This narrowing likely contributed to the relatively small number of responsive records, but omitted a lengthy review time of either already publicly available material, or responsive records that include name irrelevant to the topic requested.

The two responsive documents consist of internal DOE emails dated May 22–23, 2024, sent by a staff member to Secretary Granholm in preparation for an oversight hearing.

Both emails reference attached materials that include “UFO and UPA (sic) talking points,” indicating that UAP-related subject matter was included as part of briefing materials prepared for congressional engagement.

One attachment, partially visible in the release, specifically notes that Rep. Tim Burchett, and possibly Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, may raise issues related to “unidentified anomalous phenomena, aka UAPs or UFOs.”

The same document references the July 2023 House Oversight Committee hearing on UAPs and reiterates the Department of Defense’s public position that it has found no verifiable evidence supporting claims of recovered extraterrestrial materials or reverse-engineering programs.

While the presence of UAP-related briefing material is confirmed, the majority of substantive content is withheld which totals more than half the page. The content or context of the information withheld is unknown.

The DOE relied heavily on Exemption (b)(5), which protects “pre-decisional” and “deliberative” communications within agencies. The agency stated that the withheld material consists of internal discussions and recommendations that are part of its decision-making process, and that release “would compromise the deliberative process.”

Despite the original request spanning multiple UAP-related keywords and covering more than three years of potential correspondence, the resulting production consists solely of two emails tied to a single event: preparation for a May 2024 oversight hearing.

No standalone discussions, investigative material, or substantive internal analysis related to UAP topics were released. Additionally, while attachments were included, much of their content remains withheld or unrelated to UAP, focusing instead on energy policy topics such as the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

The release ultimately confirms that UAP-related references did exist within DOE briefing materials at the Secretary level, but provides little additional detail due to the extensive application of FOIA exemptions.

The Black Vault has filed an appeal to argue the extensive (b)(5) redactions. Those results will be posted, when available.

###

Document Archive

HQ-2024-01974-F Release Package [14 Pages, 1.3MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.38 MB]

The post FOIA Request on UAP Keywords Produces Minimal Results, Heavy Redactions, from Energy Department first appeared on The Black Vault.

The controversy centered on public remarks made by FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr in response to political commentary delivered during Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night monologues. Carr publicly criticized aspects of the content, raising concerns about media standards and bias, which in turn prompted debate over whether such criticism from a sitting FCC official could be interpreted as government pressure on protected speech. The exchange drew significant media attention and sparked broader discussion about the FCC’s role, if any, in overseeing or responding to political satire aired by broadcast networks.

The records, totaling nearly 2,000 pages, span communications from mid-2025 through early 2026 and include internal FCC emails, press inquiries, and a substantial number of complaints submitted by members of the public.

Volume of Public Complaints

A significant portion of the release consists of complaints submitted directly to the FCC by viewers reacting to the controversy. These complaints frequently reference concerns about free speech, media bias, and the role of government oversight in late-night television.

Many of the submissions express strong opinions on both sides of the issue. Some argue that government officials should not attempt to influence or criticize political satire, while others contend that certain commentary crossed lines that warranted scrutiny.

In one complaint, a member of the public framed the issue as a constitutional concern, writing that actions by officials represented “a direct violation of First Amendment rights.” In contrast, other submissions supported calls for accountability in media, citing perceived bias or inappropriate content.

The volume and tone of these complaints illustrate the degree to which the issue resonated with the public and prompted direct engagement with the FCC.

Media Inquiries and Press Pressure

The records also show that the FCC received inquiries from major media outlets seeking comment on the situation. Journalists from organizations including Reuters, Politico, and The Hollywood Reporter reached out to FCC officials with questions about the agency’s position, its authority, and Commissioner Carr’s statements.

These inquiries often focused on whether the FCC had jurisdiction over late-night programming, the implications of public criticism from a sitting commissioner, and whether any formal action was under consideration.

Internal email exchanges reflect coordination on how to respond to these inquiries, suggesting that the issue generated notable media attention and required careful messaging from within the agency.

Internal Communications and Talking Points

Internal FCC communications included discussions about how to handle the influx of complaints and media attention. In one exchange, staff referenced the need for “approved talking points” to guide responses to public inquiries and ensure consistency in messaging.

While limited in scope, these internal emails indicate that agency personnel were actively working to manage both public-facing communications and internal coordination during the controversy.

These documents provide a snapshot of how the FCC engaged with a fast-moving and politically sensitive issue involving media figures and First Amendment considerations.

While the records do not present a single unified narrative, they collectively illustrate the intersection of public opinion, media scrutiny, and internal government communication during a high-profile controversy.

###

Document Archive

FOIA Release Package [1,922, 11MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [10.66 MB]

The post FCC Records Detail Internal and Public Response to Jimmy Kimmel Controversy first appeared on The Black Vault.

The outcome raises questions not only about the scope of the Navy’s search, but also about the content and context of the briefing itself.

The names of the individuals who participated in the briefings are fully redacted from the released records.

The first request, assigned case number DON-NAVY-2021-007791, sought:

“A copy of all emails, sent to and/or from and/or cc’d and/or bcc’d Brennan P Mckernan (CIV USN DCNO N2N6), which contain the following keywords/phrases: ELIZONDO.”

The second request, DON-NAVY-2022-007539, broadened the scope. It requested:

“A copy of all emails, sent to and/or from and/or cc’d and/or bcc’d Brennan P Mckernan (CIV USN DCNO N2N6) and Luis Elizondo (as a private citizen)…”

(Note: Luis Elizondo’s personal emails addresses have been redacted by The Black Vault to protect his privacy. Although listed in the FOIA, The Black Vault is not publishing them in this article, and has redacted them in red in the FOIA response letter below.)

Both requests instructed the Navy to search across classified and unclassified systems, including SIPRNET, NIPRNET, and JWICS.

In both cases, the Navy responded that “one responsive record was found.”

That single responsive record, which is identical in each release, is an email chain arranging and confirming attendance for a March 23, 2022, presentation at Roosevelt Hall on the National Defense University campus at Fort McNair.

The subject line of the email chain reads:

The fact that the email chain originates from a message labeled “[Non-DoD Source]” is significant because it establishes that the initial outreach for the AATIP/AOIMSG presentation did not begin from within an official Department of Defense email system. Instead, it was forwarded into DoD channels from an external account, indicating coordination between government personnel and at least one non-DoD entity.

Although the sender’s identity and email address are fully redacted under Exemption (b)(6), the record’s responsiveness to both FOIA requests strongly suggests that the redacted header fields contained names central to the scope of the searches. The combination of a non-DoD originator, redacted recipient lines, and subsequent TS-SCI-level scheduling inside a SCIF at Roosevelt Hall demonstrates that external actors were engaged in arranging or participating in classified briefings involving AATIP and AOIMSG. While the redactions prevent identification of the individuals involved, the structure of the chain confirms that communications spanning government and non-government systems were directly connected to the secure sessions. Even though the scope of the original requests may offer a likely hint on who this was, it can not definitively be proven.

The event was scheduled for March 23, 2022, and structured into three sessions:

The classified sessions were explicitly described as TS-SCI (Top Secret-Sensitive Compartmented Information) level briefings:

The unclassified session would run approximately 50–55 minutes, followed by a 15-minute Q&A.

The invitation email stated that:

Brennan P. McKernan’s name, who was reported to be the director of the Pentagon’s UAP task force by Politico, does not appear anywhere in the released emails. Yet, both FOIA requests were explicitly scoped to emails “sent to and/or from and/or cc’d and/or bcc’d” him.

The fact that the email chain was deemed responsive strongly suggests that his name appears in a header field, which includes the To, From, Cc, or Bcc lines, and was redacted under FOIA Exemption (b)(6), which protects personal privacy.

Similarly, because the first request required the presence of the keyword “ELIZONDO,” and the second explicitly sought emails involving both McKernan and Luis Elizondo as a private citizen, the record’s responsiveness indicates that the term “Elizondo” appears within the email metadata or body. It is most plausibly located in a recipient or sender field, given the structure of the chain.

All personally identifying details, including email addresses, were redacted under (b)(6).

Although the released version does not visibly display Elizondo’s name in the body text, the document met the scope of both requests. That fact alone demonstrates that communications involving him likely were circulating in connection with this AATIP/AOIMSG briefing at the TS-SCI level. These documents do not prove he was in attendance, or played a role, in those briefings, but do indicate a mention, at the very least.

The Department of Defense has long maintained that AATIP had limited scope and was not a broad-based UAP investigative program, though later admitted it researched a wide variety of information channels, “from a wide variety of sources, including reports of UAPs”. At times, officials have stated that Luis Elizondo had “no assigned responsibilities” within AATIP, which has yet to be walked back or changed since they first issued the statement.

Yet this March 2022 briefing, years after AATIP’s reported 2012 end and Elizondo’s resignation from the DoD in 2017, was explicitly framed as an “AATIP/AOISMG Presentation.”

AOIMSG, established in 2021 as a successor UAP effort, was tasked with synchronizing the Department’s approach to airborne object identification. The presentation appears to have linked AATIP’s legacy activities with AOIMSG’s ongoing mission, discussing congressional reports and the “Tic-Tac” incidents, while emphasizing “adversary overmatch.”

The reference to “Tic-Tac” incidents, plural, is also notable. Public discourse has largely centered on a single 2004 USS Nimitz encounter. The email language suggests that multiple such events were discussed in the briefing itself. (Note: The Black Vault reported on a released NRO document involving a “tic-tac” incident in 2023, after this 2022 briefing. There is no other “tic-tac” incidents that are known to have been reported by any outlet beyond the Nimitz encounter at the time of the briefing, so it is unclear if it being plural was a typo, or a reference to other related “tic tac” incidents beyond the Nimitz encounter that were being discussed at the briefing.)

The use of a SCIF at the TS-SCI level for two of the three sessions clearly emphasises the classified nature of at least part of the material presented. The location, Roosevelt Hall at the National War College on the Fort McNair campus, places the event within a senior-level military academic and policy environment. However, without the recipient list which would lend hints to at least some of those who attended, it’s near impossible to determine.

None of this definitively and ultimately disproves the Department’s prior characterizations of AATIP or Elizondo’s role. However, it complicates them. A former program described as limited in scope was presented alongside its successor office in a 2022 briefing that included congressional staffers and required TS-SCI clearances.

Whether additional records exist in other offices or components about this briefing, or others, remains an open question. The releases demonstrate that communications tying together AATIP, AOIMSG, and classified briefings involving redacted participants did occur, and were documented.

They also show that even years after AATIP’s reported closure, its name continued to appear in formal presentations delivered in secure facilities to government and/or military personnel.

A request has been filed for information relating to this briefing specifically. Those results, if any, will be posted when available.

###

Document Archive

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [684.80 KB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [683.24 KB]

The post AATIP Resurfaces in 2022 TS-SCI Briefing, According to Navy FOIA Release first appeared on The Black Vault.

The decision, dated February 24, 2026, upholds a prior full denial of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by The Black Vault in September 2022 under case number DON-NAVY-2022-012661. The appeal was assigned tracking number 2026-NavyAppeal-000123.

The original request sought “all photographs with the designation of ‘unidentified aerial phenomena or ‘UAP’ as archived by the U.S. Navy.” In November 2024, the Navy’s initial denial authority determined that 78 responsive photographs existed but withheld them in full under FOIA Exemption (b)(1), citing classification under Executive Order 13526 and the UAP Classification Guide.

Appeal Denied in Full

In its appeal response, the Office of the Judge Advocate General confirmed that all 78 photographs remain classified.

“The IDA confirmed that as of today, these records are still classified in accordance with Executive Order 13526,” the letter states.

The decision further concludes that “given the nature of the requested documents, segregation was not possible,” meaning that no portion of the photographs could be released in redacted form.

The Navy emphasized that when information is properly classified under FOIA Exemption (b)(1), there is effectively no discretion to release it. Citing federal regulations, the letter states: “If potentially responsive information qualifies as exemption (b)(1) information, there is ‘no discretion’ regarding its release.”

The appeal authority added that it must defer to the Original Classification Authority (OCA), explaining: “I am satisfied that the OCA’s classification of the records responsive to your request satisfies the requirements under FOIA exemption (b)(1)… Therefore, as the DON appellate authority for FOIA appeals, I have no authority to tell the OCA otherwise.”

Accordingly, the appeal was denied.

Executive Order at the Center of Secrecy

The legal foundation for the continued withholding is Executive Order 13526, which governs the classification of national security information. The Navy’s letter reiterates that under FOIA Exemption (b)(1), agencies must withhold information that is “properly and currently classified in the interest of national defense or foreign policy, as specifically authorized under the criteria established by Executive Order.”

Executive Order 13526 permits classification of information concerning “military plans, weapons systems, or operations,” and once deemed properly classified, courts traditionally grant agencies broad deference.

The irony is difficult to overlook. The same executive authority that enables a president to order declassification is also the mechanism currently cited to block release of UAP imagery. While public rhetoric has increasingly emphasized transparency, the binding legal structure of Executive Order-based classification continues to prevail inside the FOIA process.

Public Calls for UAP Transparency

The appeal submitted in November 2025 argued that there is substantial public interest in the photographs, particularly in light of recent Congressional scrutiny over alleged UAP overclassification. It cited testimony from the November 13, 2024, congressional hearing titled “Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Exposing the Truth,” where witnesses raised concerns about excessive secrecy surrounding UAP-related material.

For now, the photographs remain classified, and the tension between calls for transparency and entrenched classification authority remains unresolved, despite the words of a sitting U.S. President and calls from Congress for the release of records.

###

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [632.52 KB]

The post Despite Trump’s Call to Release UAP Files, Navy Denies Appeal for 78 Classified UAP Photographs first appeared on The Black Vault.

The records consist of the CIA’s June 27, 2013, response to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) regarding the Committee’s Study of the Agency’s former Rendition, Detention, and Interrogation (RDI) Program. A previous version of this same document was previously released publicly in December 2014 following publication of the SSCI’s executive summary on CIA detention and interrogation practices.

A comparison of the two releases shows that the substantive content remains largely unchanged, with extensive redactions carried forward to this new release. Within the report, the CIA disputes claims that it systematically misled Congress or the Executive Branch, while acknowledging that some past representations were inaccurate.

“We cannot vouch for every individual statement that was made over the years of the program, and we acknowledge that some of those statements were wrong.”

Although there are very few new tidbits of information released, the newly released version does make more explicit reference to internal oversight structures, including the Covert Action Review Group (CARG). While CARG’s existence is now known even prior to this document and is not newly revealed, its role is more clearly articulated in this document, particularly in the section outlining lessons learned and recommended reforms.

The CIA states that the Executive Director, acting as head of CARG, should oversee expanded reviews of sensitive covert action programs, and that CARG would consider whether new covert actions warranted special scrutiny at their inception.

“At the inception of a new covert action program, the CARG would consider and recommend to DCIA whether a special review is warranted.”

The Agency describes such reviews as particularly applicable to operations that carry high potential diplomatic or national security consequences if disclosed or if they fail.

The most notable aspect of the release is not what it reveals, but how long it took to formally release material that had already entered the public domain more than a decade earlier. The CIA’s response letter closing the case is dated April 2, 2025, reasserting classification and withholding determinations for a document first approved for public release in 2014.

###

Document Archive

F-2013-02345 Release [142 Pages, 24MB]

The post CIA Reprocesses Detention Program Record Under FOIA More Than a Decade After Public Disclosure first appeared on The Black Vault.

A recent Freedom of Information Act response issued by the Department of War raises significant questions about the government’s obligations under FOIA, after officials declined to conduct even a basic email search tied to allegations surrounding the so-called “Immaculate Constellation” program.

The request, filed by The Black Vault and assigned case number 25-F-3827, sought a search of emails sent to or from Maj. Gen. Derek J. O’Malley, Director of Special Programs and Director of the Department of Defense Special Access Program Central Office, for communications containing the phrase “Immaculate Constellation.” The request explicitly asked for both classified and unclassified records.

In its final response dated January 26, 2026, the Office of the Secretary of War/Joint Staff stated that no search would be conducted at all. According to the letter, “a search was not conducted as they confirmed the subject matter itself does not exist, and an extensive email search on the custodian would not yield responsive records.”

The rationale offered by the Department of War hinges entirely on the premise that because the alleged Special Access Program does not exist, records discussing it cannot exist either. That position stands out as unusual within FOIA practice, where agencies are generally expected to conduct searches for records responsive to the wording of a request, regardless of whether the subject matter later proves to be inaccurate, unsubstantiated, or false.

Allegations, Denials, and Congressional Attention

The phrase “Immaculate Constellation” entered the public record in late 2024 following the submission of a document by Congresswoman Nancy Mace, during the “Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Exposing the Truth” hearing held on November 13, 2024. The document was later revealed to have been authored by Matthew Brown, who was subsequently profiled in a NewsNation investigation examining claims that his whistleblower allegations regarding unidentified anomalous phenomena were ignored by government agencies.

Journalist Michael Shellenberger, who testified at the UAP hearing in November 2024, also submitted extensive testimony about Immaculate Constellation and the UAP topic in general.

In parallel, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a one-page, unclassified document under FOIA case DF-2025-00021, explicitly addressing the allegation. That document summarized press reporting on the purported unacknowledged SAP and included an unequivocal denial from the Department of Defense.

“The Department of Defense has no record, present or historical, of any type of SAP called ‘IMMACULATE CONSTELLATION’,” DoD spokesperson Sue Gough stated in the document.

The ODNI record itself exists precisely because the allegation was circulating publicly and required internal documentation and assessment. The document also noted that the press had reported the issue would be raised during open hearings with the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office in November 2024.

Government Denial of Existence Does Not Eliminate FOIA Obligations

A central issue raised by FOIA case 25-F-3827 is not whether the alleged “Immaculate Constellation” program exists, but whether the government may decline to process a FOIA request based solely on its own assertion that the subject matter is fictitious.

In its response, the Department of War asserted that because the alleged Special Access Program “does not exist,” an email search would not yield responsive records and therefore was not conducted. That reasoning conflates the government’s position on the validity of an allegation with its separate obligation under FOIA to search for records responsive to the language of a request.

FOIA does not require a requester to prove that an allegation is true, nor does it allow agencies to decline a search simply because they believe a claim to be false. Federal agencies routinely create and retain records discussing inaccurate reports, rumors, hoaxes, or media-driven allegations, even when those allegations are ultimately rejected. Those records may include internal emails responding to press coverage, coordinating official denials, briefing senior leadership, or assessing whether an allegation requires follow-up. The potential falsity of an underlying claim does not negate the existence of records discussing the claim itself, nor does it relieve an agency of its obligation to search for them.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s one-page release on “Immaculate Constellation” illustrates this distinction. While the document explicitly denied the existence of the alleged SAP, it nonetheless documented internal awareness of the allegation, summarized press reporting, and recorded official responses. The existence of that record demonstrates that even when a program is denied, responsive records discussing the allegation itself can and do exist.

That distinction is directly implicated in the Department of War’s handling of case 25-F-3827. The request did not seek confirmation that “Immaculate Constellation” is real. It sought emails containing a specific phrase, which is language that had already entered official government documentation, congressional submissions, press reporting, and interagency discourse. Declining to conduct a search on the grounds that the subject matter is alleged to be nonexistent sidesteps the core procedural requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.

Contrasting FOIA Responses Across Agencies

The Department of War’s refusal to conduct a search also contrasts sharply with how other agencies have handled similar requests.

In December 2024, The Black Vault received a response from the National Security Agency to a FOIA request seeking records related to the “alleged USAP ‘Immaculate Constellation.’” Rather than asserting that no search was necessary, the NSA issued a Glomar response, stating it could neither confirm nor deny the existence of responsive records.

“For reasons described below, we are not able to confirm or deny the existence or nonexistence of these records,” the NSA wrote, adding that “the fact of the existence or non-existence of the materials you request is a currently and properly classified matter.”

The NSA further noted that this was its “standard response to all requests where we reasonably believe that the request seeks intelligence records or records revealing intelligence related activity involving UFOs/UAP.”

While Glomar responses are themselves controversial, they nonetheless reflect acknowledgment of FOIA’s requirement to address the request through established exemption frameworks. The Department of War’s approach, by contrast, bypassed the search process entirely based on an assertion about subject matter non-existence.

Why the Distinction Matters

The core issue raised by FOIA case 25-F-3827 is not whether “Immaculate Constellation” is real. It is whether an agency may refuse to search records simply because it believes an allegation is false.

FOIA does not permit agencies to pre-judge the outcome of a search and decline to conduct it on that basis alone. Records discussing false claims, responding to media narratives, or coordinating official denials are still records. Some may be classified, some exempt, and some releasable, but the search itself is a foundational requirement.

By asserting that “an extensive email search on the custodian would not yield responsive records,” without conducting that search, the Department of War effectively substituted an assumption for a records determination. That approach risks undermining the transparency mechanisms FOIA is designed to enforce, particularly in areas involving secrecy, special access programs, and public controversy.

The response letter does leave the door open for further action, inviting additional “event or file-related information” that might justify a search. Yet the existence of ODNI records, NSA correspondence, congressional submissions, and widespread press coverage already demonstrates that “Immaculate Constellation” was discussed at senior levels of government, regardless of its factual basis, thus has paved the way for The Black Vault to file an appeal on their initial decision to not honor the request.

###

Document Archive

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [225.26 KB]

The post Pentagon Refuses to Search for ‘Immaculate Constellation’ Emails first appeared on The Black Vault.

The responsive document, released under FOIA case number 24-F-0895, consists of the email invitation sent by Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough to a limited list of media recipients, outlining the terms, restrictions, and conditions for participation in the briefing with Acting All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) Director Tim Phillips.

According to the invitation email, the briefing was described as an “embargoed invited-media roundtable” focused on “AARO’s Historical Record Report Volume 1 (HRRV1), the initial volume of the congressionally directed historical record report on U.S. government UAP-related programs”.

The report itself was required by Congress in the Fiscal Year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which directed the Department of Defense and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to produce a comprehensive historical review of U.S. government involvement with unidentified anomalous phenomena dating back decades. The March 6, 2024, briefing was held two days before the public release of the unclassified version of the report.

The invitation imposed strict conditions. It was marked:

“OFF THE RECORD / FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY / NOT FOR DAYBOOKS”

While the roundtable itself was described as “on-record and off-camera,” participation was contingent upon agreeing to an embargo until the Department of Defense announced the public release of the report on March 8. Invitees were instructed:

“To receive an embargoed copy of HRRV1 and be allowed into the roundtable, please respond with an email that states: ‘I agree to the embargo.’”

Only one representative per outlet was permitted to attend, and the invitation was explicitly “not transferable” without prior approval from the Pentagon press office.

Who Was Invited and Who Was Not

The FOIA-released email reveals by name a small group of journalists and outlets that were granted access. Among those listed in the invitation or BCC fields were representatives from The New York Times, CNN, Politico, Task & Purpose, and The Washington Post, including Kayla Guo, Jeff Schogol, David Martin, Oren Liebermann, Lara Seligman, and Dan Lamothe.

Several of these names were already known publicly due to their participation in the briefing itself. In March 2024, The Black Vault published the full transcript of the roundtable, in which some reporters identified themselves by name and outlet when asking questions. That transcript provided partial insight into who had access, but not a complete accounting of all invitees.

The newly released invitation fills in additional details, but also raises new questions.

At least two individuals listed in the BCC field of the email were redacted by the Department of Defense under FOIA Exemption (b)(6), which protects against what the agency described as “a clearly unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of individuals”.

The redactions obscure whether those recipients were additional journalists, staff members from major outlets, or other media-affiliated personnel who were included quietly on the distribution list. The possibility that these names were possibly other military or government personnel rather than media invitees also can’t be ruled out.

The presence of redacted BCC recipients underscores that the publicly known list of participants, which was from the derived previously from the transcript, was incomplete. It remains unknown which outlets, if any, were represented by those redacted names, or whether additional media voices were given access without being publicly identifiable.

Unlike more typical Pentagon press engagements, which often allow larger pools of credentialed media to listen in remotely or submit written questions, this roundtable was tightly controlled. Attendance was limited, listening access was restricted, and participation was conditional on advance agreement to an embargo.

The email emphasized that the event was “an invited-media roundtable only,” reinforcing that access was selectively granted rather than broadly available.

This stands in contrast to many background or senior-level briefings, where dozens of outlets may be allowed to listen in even if only a subset are called upon to ask questions. In this case, even passive access was limited to those specifically chosen by the Department of Defense.

Transparency Concerns Around UAP Disclosure

The subject of the briefing, which highlighted the government’s historical accounting of UAP programs, has been the focus of sustained public, congressional, and media interest. The NDAA mandate reflected bipartisan concern over secrecy, oversight gaps, and inconsistent public disclosures related to unidentified objects and alleged legacy programs.

Against that backdrop, the decision to brief only a small group of journalists, under embargo, before public release has drawn scrutiny. While embargoed briefings are a common practice across government agencies, the narrow scope of this invitation, combined with the classified history and ongoing public debate surrounding UAP transparency, has amplified questions about information control and selective access.

The FOIA response letter confirms that the Office of the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs located only this single responsive document, and that no additional invitation records were released beyond the email itself.

Taken together with the previously published transcript, the FOIA-released invitation provides a clearer, albeit still incomplete, picture of how the Department of Defense managed media access to the release of Volume 1 of their UAP report.

It confirms that only a handful of outlets were selected, that participation required adherence to strict conditions, and that at least some invitees remain unidentified due to privacy redactions. As debates over UAP transparency continue, the records illustrate how access to information about the government’s historical review was carefully controlled even as the report itself was framed as a step toward openness.

The documents released in FOIA case 24-F-0895 are now part of the public record, offering a rare look behind the scenes at how the Pentagon curated press engagement on a topic Congress has explicitly directed it to clarify for the American public.

###

Document Archive

 24-F-0895 Release Package [3 Pages, 0.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [593.18 KB]

The post Closed-Door 2024 UAP Briefing: FOIA Discloses Select Media Invitees first appeared on The Black Vault.

Human Subjects Research, commonly abbreviated as HSR, refers to scientific studies that involve data obtained directly from living individuals. Such research can include physical interventions, behavioral testing, biometric data collection, or the analysis of large datasets derived from human activity. Within the Department of Energy, HSR is governed by a framework of ethical, legal, and oversight requirements designed to protect individual rights while allowing research deemed necessary for national security or scientific advancement.

A newly released Department of Energy document sheds fresh light on a subset of this research that remains classified in whole or in part. The release, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request filed by The Black Vault in March 2019, was not finalized until January 22, 2026, nearly seven years later. The responsive record is a single-page attachment titled “Projects that are Classified HSR, FY 2018 DOE Report,” which was released in full, and expands the public knowledge about HSRs that was first derived from a previously released document to the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) in 2017.

Why These Lists Exist

The requirement to compile and publish lists of classified HSR projects stems from DOE Notice 443.1, issued as part of broader reforms following revelations in the 1990s about Cold War-era human radiation experiments. Those experiments, some conducted without informed consent, prompted public outrage, congressional scrutiny, and the establishment of a presidential advisory committee to examine the government’s historical record.

In response, the Department of Energy formalized stricter oversight of human subjects research, including classified work. DOE Notice 443.1 requires that classified HSR projects be tracked and reported, even if substantive details remain protected. The intent is to ensure accountability, ethical review, and senior-level awareness of research involving human participants.

DOE Notice 443.1 was later superseded by DOE Order 443.1C, which remains in force today and preserves the requirement to track and oversee classified human subjects research. Those protections were further reinforced in 2020 when DOE codified its human subjects framework in federal regulation under 10 C.F.R. Part 745.

The Earlier Public Disclosure

In August 2018, the Federation of American Scientists published an article titled “Classified Human Subjects Research Continues at DOE,” written by Steven Aftergood. That reporting was based on a DOE FOIA release covering FY 2017 and revealed ten classified HSR projects with opaque code names such as “Tristan,” “Idaho Bailiff,” and “Moose Drool.”

The FY 2017 list, released under FOIA case HQ-2018-00158-F, showed that classified human subjects research was ongoing and formally acknowledged within DOE oversight channels. At the time, it offered one of the rare public glimpses into this tightly controlled area of research.

The New FOIA Release: FY 2018

The newly released document obtained by The Black Vault represents the subsequent fiscal year: FY 2018. According to the DOE’s final response letter, the request sought “the most recent list, as issued under DOE Notice 443.1, of the list of Human Subjects Research (HSR) projects that are classified in whole or in part.” The search was conducted by both the Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence and the Office of Science.

The FY 2018 list shows that the number of classified HSR projects increased from ten in FY 2017 to eleven open projects in FY 2018. Several projects carried over from the earlier list, while new entries appeared.

Projects listed as classified in whole during FY 2018 include:

• Tristan (99 participants)
• Helios (40 participants)
• Phanes (10 participants)
• Government Only Test2 (60 participants)
• Fusing Data (Big Data project)

Projects classified in part include titles such as Little Workers, Idaho Bailiff, Geovisor, SPECIAL2, Hidden Valley2, K-Program 1, Woodstock/Active Data, Blue Dragon, and Icarus, some involving large-scale or undefined “Big Data” participation counts.

Notably, several projects such as Tristan, Helios, Little Workers, Idaho Bailiff, Geovisor, and the VAC Challenge studies, appear on both the FY 2017 and FY 2018 lists, indicating continuing efforts rather than one-off, short-term, program studies.

What Is Known—and What Is Not

DOE maintains a publicly accessible Human Subjects Research Database that catalogs unclassified HSR projects conducted or funded by the department. That database provides project summaries, oversight information, and institutional review board status for unclassified research.

However, searches of that database do not reveal entries matching the code names listed in the classified HSR tables. While this is expected for projects classified in whole, it is notable that even the unclassified titles provided in the classified reports do not appear elsewhere in DOE’s public-facing research records.

As a result, the public is left with only high-level descriptors: project titles, participant counts, risk levels (all listed as “Minimal Risk”), and review dates. No descriptions of methodologies, objectives, or sponsoring programs are included.

While the newly released list does not provide operational details, it serves as a marker that classified research involving human participants persists within the Department of Energy. The repetition and growth of project names across fiscal years suggest structured, ongoing programs rather than isolated experiments.

For now, these lists remain one of the few official acknowledgments of the classified nature to some of these programs available to the public.

The Black Vault, as of today, filed a new request for the most recent list created by the subsequent directives mentioned earlier. Those records, when available, will be posted on The Black Vault.

###

Document Archive

FOIA Case HQ-2019-00666 [3 Pages, 0.7MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [720.05 KB]

The post From Blue Dragon to Woodstock: DOE’s Classified Human Subjects Research Revealed After 7 Year Wait first appeared on The Black Vault.

Document Archive

Abramson, Harold Alexander – [20 Pages, 9.9 MB] – Harold Alexander Abramson (November 27, 1899 – September 1980) was an American physician (allergist and pediatrician) noted as an early advocate of therapeutic LSD. He played a significant role in CIA’s MKULTRA program to investigate the military applications of LSD.

Bacher, Robert – FBI Release to Russ Kick –  [355 Pages, 146MB] Bacher, Robert – FBI Release –  [90 Pages, 10.2MB]  – Robert Fox Bacher (August 31, 1905 – November 18, 2004) was an American nuclear physicist and one of the leaders of the Manhattan Project. Born in Loudonville, Ohio, Bacher obtained his undergraduate degree and doctorate from the University of Michigan, writing his 1930 doctoral thesis under the supervision of Samuel Goudsmit on the Zeeman effect of the hyperfine structure of atomic levels. After graduate work at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), he accepted a job at Columbia University. In 1935 he accepted an offer from Hans Bethe to work with him at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, It was there that Bacher collaborated with Bethe on his book Nuclear Physics. A: Stationary States of Nuclei (1936), the first of three books that would become known as the “Bethe Bible”. In December 1940, Bacher joined the Radiation Laboratory at MIT, although he did not immediately cease his research at Cornell into the neutron cross section of cadmium. The Radiation Laboratory was organized into two sections, one for incoming radar signals, and one for outgoing radar signals. Bacher was appointed to handle the incoming signals section. Here he gained valuable experience in administration, coordinating not just the efforts of his scientists, but also those of General Electric and RCA. In 1942, Bacher was approached by Robert Oppenheimer to join the Manhattan Project at its new laboratory in Los Alamos, New Mexico. It was at Bacher’s insistence that Los Alamos became a civilian rather than a military laboratory. At Los Alamos, Bacher headed the project’s P (Physics) Division, and later its G (Gadget) Division. Bacher worked closely with Oppenheimer, and the two men discussed the project’s progress on a daily basis. Note: These records were provided by the family of anthologist and transparency activist Russ Kick, from his papers, facilitated by the generous assistance of Dr. Susan Maret. This is not a complete collection set of his papers, but rather, a selection of items sent to The Black Vault for digital preservation.

Becker, Troy – FBI Release #1 – [321 Pages, 139MB] Becker, Troy – FBI Release #2 – [371 Pages, 243MB] Becker, Troy – FBI Release #3 – [299 Pages, 17.2MB] Becker, Troy – FBI Release #4 – [237 Pages, 10.6MB] Becker, Troy – FBI Release #5 – [118 Pages, 4.5MB] Becker, Troy – FBI Release #6 – [412 Pages, 17MB] Becker, Troy – FBI Release #7 – [264 Pages, 12.3MB] Becker, Troy – FBI Release #8 – [168 Pages, 9.6MB] Becker, Troy – FBI Release #9 – [114 Pages, 45MB] Becker, Troy – FBI Release #10 – [181 Pages, 30MB] – Becker, Troy – FBI Release #11 – [66 Pages, 10MB] – Dr. Troy Eugene Becker (1916-2004) was a chemist who learned about a process to recover gold from ore.  But the federal authorities were unhappy that he claimed to be able to recover gold from ore that had no apparent gold in it, and as a result prosecuted him for fraud.  The scientific framework of the time did not allow for chemical transmutation of elements, despite the fact that such chemical transmutation had been studied by scientists throughout the world, with the results published widely in the scientific literature in the 1920s.  This work is discussed in the 2016 book Lost History by Steven B. Krivit, and the remarkable historical research in Part II of the excellent book Adept Alchemy by Robert Nelson, available online here. Becker believed that he was aggregating and recovering so-called atomic particle gold, but it appears that he may have instead stumbled into a transmutation process related to low energy nuclear reactions (LENR) that altered the mix of elements in the ore. Theorist Lewis Larsen has received patents for processes of this sort and has written extensively on the subject. After World War II, a Czechoslovakian geologist, Dr. Walter Lussage (died 1977), who worked at the University of Washington, taught Jack Keller how to capture gold using electrolysis, what he referred to as a selective precipitation process using electromagnetic resonance techniques.  Later there was experimentation with extracting platinum group metals. In turn, Lussage and Keller taught several others about the processes:  chemists Dr. Troy Becker and Dr. T. Miller, and physicist Dr. Janice M. Miller.  Victor Denny commissioned a project to recover microfine gold associated with geological deposits in Washington State.  Also involved with the group was Joseph E. Champion, who has written about this activity in his book 20th Century Alchemy. By the time the federal government brought charges of fraud, Lussage and Keller had died, as had the Millers, and Becker was the only survivor among the researchers.  Becker was unable to explain how they had taken minerals that showed no gold, silver and platinum group metals, and from that mineral extract those elements.  Expert witnesses testified that Becker must have salted the furnace with (added) those metals to the furnace for the purpose of conducting fraud.  But Becker had most likely uncovered a useful form of chemical transmutation.  The court opinion from his case is posted here. The 2016 book Hacking the Atom, by Steven B. Krivit, contains an extensive discussion of aspects of Joseph Champion’s controversial entanglement with Professor John Bockris and Texas A&M University.  Bockris faced tremendous professional criticism from his research into transmutation.

Bohr, Niels – FBI Release #1 – [396 Pages, 19.83MB] Bohr, Niels – FBI Release #2 – [6 Pages, 1.4MB] – Niels Henrik David Bohr (7 October 1885 – 18 November 1962) was a Danish physicist who made foundational contributions to understanding atomic structure and quantum theory, for which he received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1922. Bohr was also a philosopher and a promoter of scientific research. Bohr developed the Bohr model of the atom, in which he proposed that energy levels of electrons are discrete and that the electrons revolve in stable orbits around the atomic nucleus but can jump from one energy level (or orbit) to another. Although the Bohr model has been supplanted by other models, its underlying principles remain valid. He conceived the principle of complementarity: that items could be separately analyzed in terms of contradictory properties, like behaving as a wave or a stream of particles. The notion of complementarity dominated Bohr’s thinking in both science and philosophy.

Bostick, Winston – [63 Pages, 30MB] – Winston H. Bostick (March 5, 1916 – January 19, 1991) was an American physicist who discovered plasmoids, plasma focus, and plasma vortex phenomena. He simulated cosmical astrophysics with laboratory plasma experiments, and showed that Hubble expansion can be produced with repulsive mutual induction between neighboring galaxies acting as homopolar generators. His work on plasmas was claimed to be evidence for finite-sized elementary particles and the composition of strings, but this is not accepted by mainstream science.

Breslow, Lester – [396 Pages, 19.83 MB] – Lester Breslow (March 17, 1915, in Bismarck, ND, USA – April 9, 2012, in Los Angeles) was an American physician who promoted public health. He received his undergraduate degree from the University of Minnesota, which is also where he received his MD and MPH. Dr. Breslow served in the United States Army during World War II, and when he returned took a position with the California State Department of Public Health. While in medical school he was studying to be a psychiatrist, and as a junior he worked for a summer in the Fergus Falls Minnesota State Hospital for the Insane. His experience there left him discouraged once he realized that in that time, there was not much they could do for those patients except keep them out of harm’s way. When he returned to medical school for his senior year he told a friend on his, also a faculty member, about his feelings and was introduced to a new professor of public health, Gaylord Anderson. Anderson was the one that got Breslow set on a career in epidemiology. Dr. Breslow was considered an exemplary doctor as well as a genuinely good person. In an obituary written by one of his former “protégées” it says, “I was one of Lester’s preventative medicine residents 15 years ago…Having had an opportunity to observe him engage with ‘paupers’ and ‘kings,’ I can attest to his treatment of all with respect and appreciation for their humanity, abilities, and contributions. I can also attest to his refusal to accept anything less than the best, from others (like me!) and particularly, from himself.”

Brown, Thomas Townsend – [4 Pages, 0.8MB] – Thomas Townsend Brown (March 18, 1905 – October 27, 1985) was an American inventor whose research into odd electrical effects led him to believe he had discovered a connection between strong electric fields and gravity, a type of antigravity effect. For most of his life he attempted to develop devices based on his ideas, trying to promote them for use by industry and the military. He came up with the name “Biefeld–Brown effect” for the phenomenon he had discovered and called the field of study electrogravitics. According to the FBI, the files relating to Brown are either lost or destroyed or both.

Bush, Vannevar – [ 241 Pages, 78.1 MB ] – Vannevar Bush (March 11, 1890 – June 28, 1974) was an American engineer, inventor and science administrator, whose most important contribution was as head of the U.S. Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD) during World War II, through which almost all wartime military R&D was carried out, including initiation and early administration of the Manhattan Project. He is also known in engineering for his work on analog computers, for founding Raytheon, and for the memex, an adjustable microfilm viewer with a structure analogous to that of the World Wide Web.  Bush was also an alleged member of the Majestic-12 (MJ-12) group.  Please note: As admitted by the FBI, an entire file on Bush was destroyed. According to the FBI: “One record (161-BS-1452) which may be responsive to your FOIA request was destroyed in April of 1998.”

Cameron, Donald Ewen – [21 Pages, 8.3MB ] – Donald Ewen Cameron (24 December 1901 – 8 September 1967) — known as D. Ewen Cameron or Ewen Cameron — was a Scottish-born psychiatrist who served as President of the American Psychiatric Association (1952–1953), Canadian Psychiatric Association (1958-1959), American Psychopathological Association (1963), Society of Biological Psychiatry (1965) and World Psychiatric Association (1961-1966). In spite of his high professional reputation, he has been criticized for administering electroshock therapy and experimental drugs to patients without their informed consent. Some of this work took place in the context of the Project MKUltra mind control program.

Condon, Edward Uhler [ File #1 (312MB) | File #2 (0.1MB) | File #3 (0.1MB) | File #4 (177MB) ]- [ 1,777 Pages ] – Edward Uhler Condon (March 2, 1902 – March 26, 1974) was a distinguished American nuclear physicist, a pioneer in quantum mechanics, and a participant in the development of radar and nuclear weapons during World War II as part of the Manhattan Project. The Franck–Condon principle and the Slater–Condon rules are named after him.  Condon became widely known in 1968 as principal author of the Condon Report, an official review funded by the United States Air Force that concluded that unidentified flying objects (UFOs) have prosaic explanations. The lunar crater Condon is named for him.  Please note: The FBI stated there MAY be additional records pertaining to Condon. I requested the remaining material, and if any exists, will post it when available. Press the “subscribe” button for this page to be notified when it’s updated.

Cortright, Edgar – [15 Pages, 0.6MB] – Edgar Maurice Cortright (July 29, 1923 – May 4, 2014) was a scientist and engineer, and senior official at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the United States. His most prominent positions during his career were Director of NASA’s Langley Research Center, and Chairman of the Apollo 13 Review Board which investigated the explosion that occurred during the Apollo 13 spaceflight in 1970.

Crary, Albert – [7 Pages, 3.8MB] – Albert Paddock Crary (July 25, 1911 – October 29, 1987), was a pioneer polar geophysicist and glaciologist.  He was the first person to have stepped foot on both the North and South Poles, having made it to the North Pole on May 3, 1952 (with Joseph O. Fletcher and William P. Benedict) and then to the South Pole on February 12, 1961, as the leader of a team of eight.  The South Pole expedition set out from McMurdo Station on December 10, 1960, using three Snowcats with trailers. Crary was the seventh expedition leader to arrive at the South Pole by surface transportation (the six others before him were—in sequence—Amundsen, Scott, Hillary, Fuchs, a Russian expedition in 1959/60 from Vostok base, and Antero Havola).  He was widely admired for his intellect, wit, skills and as a great administrator for polar research expeditions.

Craven, John P. – FBI Release #1 – [16 Pages, 1MB] Craven, John P. – FBI Release #2 – [5 Pages, 1.1MB] – John Piña Craven (October 30, 1924 – February 12, 2015) was an American scientist who was known for his involvement with Bayesian search theory and the recovery of lost objects at sea. He was Chief Scientist of the Special Projects Office of the United States Navy.

Davidson, Leon – FBI Cross References – [13 Pages, 4MB] – Leon Davidson (October 18, 1922 – January 1, 2007) was a chemical engineer and scientist, one of the team that developed the atomic bomb.

Eaton, Suzanne – FBI Release #1 – [20 Pages, 5.5MB] – Suzanne Eaton (December 23, 1959 – July 2, 2019) was an American scientist and professor of molecular biology at the Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics in Dresden, Germany.

Einstein, Albert – [ File #1 | File #2 | File #3 | File #4 | File #5 | File #6 | File #7 | File #8 | File #9| File #10 | File #11 | File #12 | File #13 | File #14 ] – An investigation was conducted by the FBI regarding the famous physicist because of his affiliation with the Communist Party. Einstein was a member, sponsor, or affiliated with thirty-four communist fronts between 1937-1954. He also served as honorary chairman for three communist organizations.

Erdos, Paul FBI Release #1 – [233 Pages, 13.2 MB]  Erdos, Paul FBI Release #2 – [39 Pages, 15.3 MB]  Erdos, Paul DOD Release #1 – [7 Pages, 1.5 MB] Paul Erdős (26 March 1913 – 20 September 1996) was a Hungarian mathematician. He was one of the most prolific mathematicians of the 20th century, but also known for his social practice of mathematics (more than 500 collaborators) and eccentric lifestyle (Time magazine called him The Oddball’s Oddball). Erdős pursued problems in combinatorics, graph theory, number theory, classical analysis, approximation theory, set theory, and probability theory. According to the FBI in release #2 – files were destroyed on Paul Erdos. The State Department withheld 12 pages related to Erdos, claiming all were regarding VISA papers, and exempt from disclosure.

Estabrooks, George Hoben – FBI Release #1 – [498 Pages, 278.7MB]  Estabrooks, George Hoben – FBI Release #2 – [40 Pages, 19.1MB] – George Hoben Estabrooks (December 16, 1895 – December 30, 1973) was a Canadian-American psychologist who would die in the County of Madison, New York which was the home county for Colgate University. George Estabrooks was a Harvard University graduate, a Rhodes Scholar, chairman of the Department of Psychology at Colgate University and an authority on hypnosis during World War II. He is known for hypnoprogramming U.S. government agents during World War II.

Everett, Hugh – [26 Pages, 13.3MB] – Hugh Everett III (November 11, 1930 – July 19, 1982) was an American physicist who first proposed the many-worlds interpretation (MWI) of quantum physics, which he termed his “relative state” formulation. In contrast to the then-dominant Copenhagen interpretation, the MWI posits that the Schrödinger equation never collapses and that all possibilities of a quantum superposition are objectively real.

Ewing, Dr. Maurice  – [15 Pages, 5.4MB] – William Maurice “Doc” Ewing (May 12, 1906 – May 4, 1974) was an American geophysicist and oceanographer.  Ewing has been described as a pioneering geophysicist who worked on the research of seismic reflection and refraction in ocean basins, ocean bottom photography, submarine sound transmission (including the SOFAR channel), deep sea coring of the ocean bottom, theory and observation of earthquake surface waves, fluidity of the Earth’s core, generation and propagation of microseisms, submarine explosion seismology, marine gravity surveys, bathymetry and sedimentation, natural radioactivity of ocean waters and sediments, study of abyssal plains and submarine canyons.  (Note: By letter dated 16 March 2018 from the FBI, it was revealed that any additional documentation on Dr. Ewing was destroyed on 12/23/2004.)

Fermi, Enrico – [4 Pages, 1.7MB] – Enrico Fermi (29 September 1901 – 28 November 1954) was an Italian physicist, who created the world’s first nuclear reactor, the Chicago Pile-1. He has been called the “architect of the nuclear age” and the “architect of the atomic bomb”.   He was one of the few physicists to excel both theoretically and experimentally. Fermi held several patents related to the use of nuclear power, and was awarded the 1938 Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on induced radioactivity by neutron bombardment and the discovery of transuranic elements. He made significant contributions to the development of quantum theory, nuclear and particle physics, and statistical mechanics. Fermi does have an FBI File, in which I received confirmation that the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) declassified the majority of it – but I am unable to pay the fees for copies. If you are interested in sponsoring the file, CONTACT ME.

Fishbein, Dr. Morris – FBI Release #1 – [104 Pages, 6.9MB]  Fishbein, Dr. Morris – FBI Release #2 – [5 Pages, 3.6MB] – Morris Fishbein M.D. (July 22, 1889 – September 27, 1976) was a physician who became the editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) from 1924 to 1950. In 1961 he became the founding Editor of Medical World News, a magazine for doctors. In 1970 he endowed the Morris Fishbein Center. He was also notable for exposing quacks, notably the goat-gland surgeon John R. Brinkley, and campaigning for regulation of medical devices.

Garfield, Eugene – [286 Pages, 16MB] – Eugene Eli Garfield (September 16, 1925 – February 26, 2017) was an American linguist and businessman, one of the founders of bibliometrics and scientometrics. He helped to create Current Contents, Science Citation Index (SCI), Journal Citation Reports, and Index Chemicus, among others, and founded the magazine The Scientist.

Glushkov, Victor – FBI Release #1 – [114 Pages, 54MB] Glushkov, Victor – FBI Release #2 – [6 Pages, 1.8MB] – Victor Glushkov, born on August 24, 1923, in Rostov-on-Don, Soviet Union, was a pioneering computer scientist and mathematician known for his significant contributions to cybernetics and computer science in the Soviet Union. Glushkov’s work was groundbreaking in the field of theoretical computer science, and he is particularly renowned for his efforts in automata theory and the development of early Soviet computers. He envisioned a network of computers to manage the Soviet economy, a concept that predated the Internet, reflecting his forward-thinking approach to information technology. As the founder and director of the Institute of Cybernetics in Kyiv, Glushkov played a key role in the development of Soviet computing technology and contributed to the establishment of cybernetics as a scientific discipline. His legacy is marked by his influential theories and practical advancements in computer science, which have had a lasting impact on the field globally. Victor Glushkov passed away on January 30, 1982, leaving behind a profound legacy in the world of computing and cybernetics.

Gofman, John – [80 Pages, 4.6MB] – John William Gofman (September 21, 1918 – August 15, 2007) was an American scientist and advocate. He was Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology at University of California at Berkeley.

Goldwasser, Ned – FBI Release – [219 Pages, 41.3MB] Goldwasser, Ned – DOE Release – [10 Pages, 2.5MB] – Ned Goldwasser (born Edwin L. Goldwasser, March 9, 1919 — December 14, 2016) was an American physicist and Co-Founder of the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory and the field of particle physics. He was a Professor of Physics Emeritus and former Vice Chancellor of Academic Affairs at the University of Illinois, as well as the first Deputy Director of Fermilab National Accelerator Laboratory. His interests were photons, cosmic rays, charged particles and elementary particles. He was Fellow to the American Association for the Advancement of Science and American Physical Society.

Grove, Andrew S. – [142 Pages, 54MB] – Andrew Stephen “Andy” Grove (born András István Gróf, Hungarian: Gróf András István; 2 September 1936 – 21 March 2016) was a Hungarian-born American businessman, engineer, author and a science pioneer in the semiconductor industry. He escaped from Communist-controlled Hungary at the age of 20 and moved to the United States where he finished his education. He was one of the founders and the CEO of Intel Corporation, helping transform the company into the world’s largest manufacturer of semiconductors.

Haefner, Richard Charles– [71 Pages, 4MB] – Dr. Richard Charles Haefner was a talented but deeply troubled geologist, remembered as much for his contributions to geology and petrology as for his violent and unpredictable nature. After earning a BS from Franklin and Marshall College in 1965, an MS in 1969, and a PhD in 1972 from Penn State University, Haefner was appointed head of the Los Angeles Museum of Natural History and a prestigious teaching position at USC in 1975. However, his career was derailed that same year by allegations of pedophilia and child molestation, leading to his arrest and disgrace. Despite a hung jury and expunged trial records, these allegations continued to haunt him, preventing him from securing any professional positions thereafter. The controversy surrounding Haefner was chronicled in the 2018 book “Justice Perverted: The Molestation Mistrial of Richard Charles Haefner.” Additionally, he has been implicated as the probable killer of Betsy Ruth Aardsma, a former girlfriend. Haefner died in 2002 from a congenital heart defect, with his final resting place and the whereabouts of his ashes remaining uncertain.

Heimlich, Henry – [10 Pages, 2.5MB] – Henry Judah Heimlich (February 3, 1920 – December 17, 2016) was an American thoracic surgeon and medical researcher. He is widely credited as the inventor of the Heimlich maneuver, a technique of abdominal thrusts for stopping choking, described in Emergency Medicine in 1974. He also invented the Micro Trach portable oxygen system for ambulatory patients and the Heimlich Chest Drain Valve, or “flutter valve,” which drains blood and air out of the chest cavity.

Hiskey, Clarence Francis – FBI Release #1 – [1,221 Pages, 731MB] Note: LARGE File Download Hiskey, Clarence Francis – FBI Release #2 – [16 Pages, 1.5MB] – Clarence Francis Hiskey was a renowned American chemist who worked on the Manhattan Project, the research program that led to the creation of the atomic bomb during World War II. His work focused on the separation and analysis of Uranium isotopes, a key element in the production of the bomb. Despite his contributions to the project, Hiskey’s political ideologies led to suspicion; he was accused of being a communist in the late 1940s during the Red Scare. Hiskey moved to Canada and became a key figure in the development of Canada’s nuclear energy program, his career marked by his profound impact on nuclear science and the ensuing political complications.

Khalifa, Rashad – FBI Release #1 – [23 Pages, 11.9MB]  Khalifa, Rashad – FBI Release #2 – [293 Pages, 136MB]  Khalifa, Rashad – FBI Release #3 – [344 Pages, 155MB]  Khalifa, Rashad – FBI Release #4 – [25 Pages, 1.5MB] – Rashad Khalifa (1935–1990) was an Egyptian-American biochemist renowned for his controversial work in the realm of religious studies rather than his contributions to biochemistry. Born in Egypt, Khalifa moved to the United States in the 1950s, where he earned a Ph.D. in biochemistry. However, he gained international attention for his assertion that the Quran contained a mathematical code based on the number 19, a claim that led him to reject certain verses of the scripture. Establishing a religious community in Tucson, Arizona, that followed his teachings, he proclaimed himself as a messenger of God, a claim that generated significant backlash from mainstream Islamic scholars and communities. His controversial stance made him a polarizing figure, culminating in his assassination in 1990, believed to have been motivated by his religious teachings.

Kohn, Walter – [175 Pages, 75.6MB] – Walter Kohn (March 9, 1923 – April 19, 2016) was an Austrian-born American theoretical physicist and theoretical chemist. He was awarded, with John Pople, the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1998. The award recognized their contributions to the understandings of the electronic properties of materials. In particular, Kohn played the leading role in the development of density functional theory, which made it possible to calculate quantum mechanical electronic structure by equations involving the electronic density (rather than the many-body wavefunction). This computational simplification led to more accurate calculations on complex systems as well as many new insights, and it has become an essential tool for materials science, condensed-phase physics, and the chemical physics of atoms and molecules.

Leary, Timothy – FBI Release #1 – [78 Pages, 44.0MB]  Leary, Timothy – FBI Release #2 – [234 Pages, 109MB]  Leary, Timothy – NARA Releases – [84 Pages, 7.2MB] – Timothy Francis Leary (October 22, 1920 – May 31, 1996) was an American psychologist and writer known for advocating the exploration of the therapeutic potential of psychedelic drugs under controlled conditions. Leary conducted experiments under the Harvard Psilocybin Project during American legality of LSD and psilocybin, resulting in the Concord Prison Experiment and the Marsh Chapel Experiment. Leary’s colleague, Richard Alpert (Ram Dass), was fired from Harvard University on May 27, 1963 for giving psilocybin to an undergraduate student. Leary was planning to leave Harvard when his teaching contract expired in June, the following month. He was fired, for “failure to keep classroom appointments”, with his pay docked on April 30.

Lilly, John Cunningham – [26 Pages, 8.0 MB ] – John Cunningham Lilly (January 6, 1915 – September 30, 2001) was an American physician, neuroscientist, psychoanalyst, psychonaut, philosopher, writer and inventor. He was a researcher of the nature of consciousness using mainly isolation tanks, dolphin communication, and psychedelic drugs, sometimes in combination.

Mallove, Eugene – FBI Release #1 – [18 Pages, 7.5MB ] Mallove, Eugene – FBI Release #2 – [208 Pages, 20MB ] – Eugene Franklin Mallove (June 9, 1947 – May 14, 2004) was an American scientist, science writer, editor, and publisher of Infinite Energy magazine, and founder of the nonprofit organization New Energy Foundation. He was a proponent of cold fusion, and a supporter of its research and related exploratory alternative energy topics, several of which are sometimes characterised as “fringe science”.

Mead, Margaret – FBI Release #1 – [238 Pages, 115.9MB]  Mead, Margaret – FBI Release #2 – [102 Pages, 11MB]  Mead, Margaret – FBI Release #3 – [93 Pages, 9.7MB] – Margaret Mead (December 16, 1901 – November 15, 1978) was an American cultural anthropologist who featured frequently as an author and speaker in the mass media during the 1960s and 1970s.  She earned her bachelor’s degree at Barnard College in New York City and her M.A. and Ph.D. degrees from Columbia University. Mead was a respected and often controversial academic who popularized the insights of anthropology in modern American and Western culture.  Her reports detailing the attitudes towards sex in South Pacific and Southeast Asian traditional cultures influenced the 1960s sexual revolution. She was a proponent of broadening sexual mores within a context of traditional Western religious life.

Millikan, Robert – [6 Pages, 0.8 MB] – Robert Andrews Millikan (March 22, 1868 – December 19, 1953) was an American experimental physicist honored with the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1923 for the measurement of the elementary electronic charge and for his work on the photoelectric effect. Millikan graduated from Oberlin College in 1891 and obtained his doctorate at Columbia University in 1895. In 1896 he became an assistant at the University of Chicago, where he became a full professor in 1910. In 1909 Millikan began a series of experiments to determine the electric charge carried by a single electron. He began by measuring the course of charged water droplets in an electric field. The results suggested that the charge on the droplets is a multiple of the elementary electric charge, but the experiment was not accurate enough to be convincing. He obtained more precise results in 1910 with his famous oil-drop experiment in which he replaced water (which tended to evaporate too quickly) with oil.  In 1914 Millikan took up with similar skill the experimental verification of the equation introduced by Albert Einstein in 1905 to describe the photoelectric effect. He used this same research to obtain an accurate value of Planck’s constant. In 1921 Millikan left the University of Chicago to become director of the Norman Bridge Laboratory of Physics at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) in Pasadena, California. There he undertook a major study of the radiation that the physicist Victor Hess had detected coming from outer space. Millikan proved that this radiation is indeed of extraterrestrial origin, and he named it “cosmic rays.” As chairman of the Executive Council of Caltech (the school’s governing body at the time) from 1921 until his retirement in 1945, Millikan helped to turn the school into one of the leading research institutions in the United States. He also served on the board of trustees for Science Service, now known as Society for Science & the Public, from 1921 to 1953.

Moon, Robert James – Cross References – [40 Pages, 27.9MB] – Robert James Moon (February 14, 1911 – November 1, 1989) was an American physicist, chemist and engineer. An important figure in 20th century nuclear science, he was involved in America’s wartime Manhattan Project. He pioneered work on the fundamental structure of the atomic nucleus based on platonic solids.

Murray, Bruce [151 Pages, 6.65MB] – Bruce Churchill Murray (November 30, 1931 – August 29, 2013) was an American planetary scientist. He was a director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and co-founder of The Planetary Society.

Murray, Henry [14 Pages, 5.9MB] – Henry Alexander Murray (May 13, 1893 – June 23, 1988) was an American psychologist at Harvard University. He was Director of the Harvard Psychological Clinic in the School of Arts and Sciences after 1930. Murray developed a theory of personality called personology, based on “need” and “press”. Murray was also a co-developer, with Christiana Morgan, of the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), which he referred to as “the second best-seller that Harvard ever published, second only to the Harvard Handbook of Music.”

Ochsner Sr., Dr. Alton – [ 31 Pages, 20.81MB ]  File #2 – [ 55 Pages, 4.31 MB ]  File #3 – [ 4 Pages, 0.2 MB ] – Alton Ochsner, Sr. (May 4, 1896 – September 24, 1981), was a surgeon and medical researcher who worked at Tulane University and other New Orleans hospitals before he established his own world-renowned The Ochsner Clinic, now known as Ochsner Foundation Hospital. Among its many services are heart transplants.

Olson, Dr. Frank – [10 Pages, 2.9MB] – Frank Rudolph Olson (July 17, 1910 – November 28, 1953) was an American bacteriologist, biological warfare scientist, and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee who worked at Camp Detrick (now Fort Detrick) in Maryland. In rural Maryland, he was covertly dosed with LSD by his CIA supervisor and, nine days later, plunged to his death from the window of a New York City hotel room. Some — including the U.S. government — term his death a suicide, while others allege murder.

Oppenheimer, J. Robert – [ 1,251 Pages, 75.31MB ] – Julius Robert Oppenheimer (April 22, 1904 – February 18, 1967) was an American theoretical physicist and professor of physics at the University of California, Berkeley. He is among the persons who are often called the “father of the atomic bomb” for his role in the Manhattan Project, the World War II project that developed the first nuclear weapons. The first atomic bomb was detonated on July 16, 1945, in the Trinity test in New Mexico; Oppenheimer remarked later that it brought to mind words from the Bhagavad Gita: “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.”

Parsons, John aka Parsons, Marvel Whiteside – [174 Pages, 87.7MB] – John Whiteside Parsons (born Marvel Whiteside Parsons; October 2, 1914 – June 17, 1952), better known as Jack Parsons, was an American rocket engineer and rocket propulsion researcher, chemist, and Thelemite occultist. Associated with the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), Parsons was one of the principal founders of both the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and the Aerojet Engineering Corporation. He invented the first rocket engine using a castable, composite rocket propellant, and pioneered the advancement of both liquid-fuel and solid-fuel rockets.

Reich, Wilhelm – [5 Pages, 0.8MB] – Wilhelm Reich (24 March 1897 – 3 November 1957) was an Austrian psychoanalyst. Author of several influential books – most notably Character Analysis (1933), The Mass Psychology of Fascism (1933) and The Sexual Revolution (1936) – Reich became known as one of the most radical practitioners of psychiatry. His file is very small, and consists of an autopsy analysis request after his death, after it was feared he was poisoned.

Reik, Theodor – Cross References – [12 Pages, 5MB] – Theodor Reik (12 May 1888, Vienna, Austria – 31 December 1969, New York) was a psychoanalyst who trained as one of Freud’s first students in Vienna, Austria, and was a pioneer of lay analysis in the United States.

Robertson, Howard P. – [180 Pages, 7.5MB] – Howard Percy “Bob” Robertson (January 27, 1903 – August 26, 1961) was an American mathematician and physicist known for contributions related to physical cosmology and the uncertainty principle. He was Professor of Mathematical Physics at the California Institute of Technology and Princeton University. Note: It was discovered that additional records to Robertson were destroyed. On top of that, additional records are located at the National Archives, which I will post when the FOIA request comes in.

Rubin, Vera – [103 Pages, 51MB] – Vera Florence Cooper Rubin (July 23, 1928 – December 25, 2016) was an American astronomer who pioneered work on galaxy rotation rates.  She uncovered the discrepancy between the predicted angular motion of galaxies and the observed motion, by studying galactic rotation curves. This phenomenon became known as the galaxy rotation problem, and was evidence of the existence of dark matter. Although initially met with skepticism, Rubin’s results were confirmed over subsequent decades. Her legacy was described by The New York Times as “ushering in a Copernican-scale change” in cosmological theory.

Sagan, Carl – [39 Pages, 5MB] – Dr. Carl Sagan on November 15, 1983, received a letter addressed to him at the Space Science Building, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. The letter spun stories of possible terrorist happenings. The communiqué was signed “M. Springfield.” A pretext call was made to M. Springfield who was located in the telephone directory. The call revealed that M. Springfield died in 1972, and his widow now resides at the address. She had no knowledge of the letter sent to Dr. Sagan.

Schwarz, Fred – [757 Pages, 53.4MB ] – Doctor Frederick Charles Schwarz (15 January 1913 – 24 January 2009) was an Australian physician and political activist who founded the Christian Anti-Communism Crusade (CACC). He made a number of speaking tours in the USA in the 1950s, and in 1960 moved his base of operations to California.  He was the author of the international bestseller, You Can Trust The Communists (to be Communists) (Prentice Hall, 1960). Dr Schwarz worked with his wife, Lillian Schwarz, from abroad and, in his later years, at their home in Camden, near Sydney, in the Australian state of New South Wales.

Seaborg, Glenn – [432 Pages, 258MB] – Glenn Theodore Seaborg (April 19, 1912 – February 25, 1999) was an American chemist whose involvement in the synthesis, discovery and investigation of ten transuranium elements earned him a share of the 1951 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. His work in this area also led to his development of the actinide concept and the arrangement of the actinide series in the periodic table of the elements.  Note: By letter dated June 12, 2018, the FBI stated that additional records that were possibly on Glenn Seaborg were destroyed.  This now represents the complete file held on Seaborg by the FBI.

Shapiro, Zalman – [33 Pages, 4MB] – Zalman Shapiro (1920-2016) was an American chemist and inventor known for his significant contributions to the development of nuclear technology. Born in Canton, Ohio, he earned a doctorate in chemistry from Johns Hopkins University. Shapiro is best remembered for his pioneering work at the Westinghouse Electric Corporation, where he played a crucial role in the development of the nuclear fuel for the world’s first commercial nuclear-powered submarine, the USS Nautilus. Additionally, he held numerous patents and founded Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC), which specialized in the production of nuclear materials. Shapiro’s work not only advanced nuclear engineering but also left a lasting impact on the field of energy and national defense.

Shockley, William Bradford – [96 Pages, 51.4MB ] – William Bradford Shockley Jr. (February 13, 1910 – August 12, 1989) was an American physicist and inventor. Shockley was the manager of a research group that included John Bardeen and Walter Brattain. The three scientists invented the point-contact transistor in 1947 and were jointly awarded the 1956 Nobel Prize in Physics. Shockley’s attempts to commercialize a new transistor design in the 1950s and 1960s led to California’s “Silicon Valley” becoming a hotbed of electronics innovation. In his later life, Shockley was a professor of electrical engineering at Stanford University and became a proponent of eugenics.

Singer, Margaret – FBI Release #1- [98 Pages, 47.1MB]  Singer, Margaret – Executive Office for United States Attorneys Release #1- [5 Pages, 1MB]Margaret Thaler Singer (July 29, 1921 – November 23, 2003) was a clinical psychologist and researcher with her colleague Lyman Wynne of family communication.  She was a prominent figure in the study of undue influence in social and religious contexts. Singer’s main areas of research included schizophrenia, family therapy, brainwashing and coercive persuasion. In the 1960s she began to study the nature of social and religious group influence and mind control, and sat as a board member of the American Family Foundation and as an advisory board member of the Cult Awareness Network. She was the co-author of the book Cults in Our Midst.

Smith, Phillip Meek (Release #1) – [ 29 Pages, 27.9MB ]  Smith, Phillip Meek (Release #2) – [ 9 Pages, 0.9MB ] – Dr. Smith was Director of the National Research Council of the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering from 1981 to mid-1994. Previously, he was an Associate Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy for Natural Resources, Energy and Science from 1975 to 1981 and branch chief for science at the Office of Management and Budget from 1972 to 1973. Earlier he directed large-scale international research programs in the geophysical sciences at the National Science Foundation. In the 1950s, Smith conducted research in Antarctica and explored then uncharted regions of the continent.

Spock, Benjamin – [513 Pages, 35MB] – Benjamin McLane Spock (May 2, 1903 – March 15, 1998) was an American pediatrician and liberal political activist whose book Baby and Child Care (1946) is one of the best-selling books of the twentieth century, selling 500,000 copies in the six months after its initial publication in 1946 and 50 million by the time of Spock’s death in 1998. The book’s premise to mothers was that they “know more than you think you do.” Spock’s parenting advice and recommendations revolutionized parental upbringing in the United States, and he is considered to be amongst the most famous and influential Americans of the 20th century.

Teller, Edward (FBI Release #1) – [63 Pages, 11.57MB]  Teller, Edward (FBI Release #2) – [84 Pages, 42.3MB] – This release was received in November of 2016. It comprised of the remaining material from the following agencies: USCIS, CIA, AFOSI, DOS and DOE.  Teller, Edward (CIA Release) – [8 Pages, 0.7MB] – This was some material forwarded to the CIA from the FBI for declassification. It was released in September of 2015.  Teller, Edward (AFOSI Release) – [4 Pages, 0.6MB] Edward Teller (January 15, 1908 – September 9, 2003) was a Hungarian-born American theoretical physicist who, although he claimed he did not care for the title, is known as “the father of the hydrogen bomb”.  When I first requested Teller’s file, I was told it would be more than 3,500 pages, and incur fees of more than $100. After a few months, I received part of his file, and then more pages were forwarded to multiple agencies.  I am a bit confused how this FOIA request turned out, but as I receive the pages, I will add them accordingly.

Tesla, Nikola – FBI Release #1 – [290 Pages, 53.52MB]  Tesla, Nikola – FBI Release #2 – [354 Pages, 24.5MB] – September 2016 Release – I had previously received a stack of Tesla files, as archived below. This release, with the impression it was a “new” release, is largely duplicate with what I had received previously (link below). However, there are approximately 65+ pages of ‘new’ material at least. I did not go line by line and page by page – however, I will continue to archive both releases here for research.  Tesla, Nikola – FBI Release #3 – [68 Pages, 39.8MB] – April 2018 Release – Nikola Tesla (10 July 1856 – 7 January 1943) was a Serbian American inventor, electrical engineer, mechanical engineer, physicist, and futurist best known for his contributions to the design of the modern alternating current (AC) electricity supply system.  Tesla gained experience in telephony and electrical engineering before emigrating to the United States in 1884 to work for Thomas Edison. He soon struck out on his own with financial backers, setting up laboratories and companies to develop a range of electrical devices. His patented AC induction motor and transformer were licensed by George Westinghouse, who also hired Tesla as a consultant to help develop a power system using alternating current. Tesla is also known for his high-voltage, high-frequency power experiments in New York and Colorado Springs which included patented devices and theoretical work used in the invention of radio communication, for his X-ray experiments, and for his ill-fated attempt at intercontinental wireless transmission in his unfinished Wardenclyffe Tower project.

Trump, John G. – [16 Pages, 2.2MB] – John George Trump (August 21, 1907 – February 21, 1985) was an American electrical engineer, inventor, and physicist. He was a recipient of U.S. President Ronald Reagan’s National Medal of Science, and a member of the National Academy of Engineering. Trump was noted for developing rotational radiation therapy. Together with Robert J. Van de Graaff, he developed one of the first million-volt X-ray generators. He was also the uncle of President-elect of the United States, Donald Trump.  These documents consist of the entire FOIA case file, and processing notes, to the request I did wherein it was told to me files relating to John G. Trump were destroyed.

von Braun, Wernher – [331 Pages, 36.1MB] – Wernher Magnus Maximilian Freiherr von Braun (March 23, 1912 – June 16, 1977) was a German, later American, aerospace engineer and space architect credited with inventing the V-2 rocket for Nazi Germany and the Saturn V for the United States. He was one of the leading figures in the development of rocket technology in Nazi Germany, where he was a member of the Nazi Party and the SS. Following World War II, he was moved to the United States, along with about 1,500 other scientists, engineers, and technicians, as part of Operation Paperclip, where he developed the rockets that launched the United States’ first space satellite Explorer 1, and the Apollo program manned lunar landings. In his twenties and early thirties, von Braun worked in Germany’s rocket development program, where he helped design and develop the V-2 rocket at Peenemünde during World War II. Following the war, von Braun worked for the United States Army on an intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) program before his group was assimilated into NASA. Under NASA, he served as director of the newly formed Marshall Space Flight Center and as the chief architect of the Saturn V launch vehicle, the superbooster that propelled the Apollo spacecraft to the Moon. In 1975, he received the National Medal of Science. He continued insisting on the human mission to Mars throughout his life.

von Neumann, John – [110 Pages, 7MB] – John von Neumann (December 28, 1903 – February 8, 1957) was a Hungarian-American mathematician, physicist, computer scientist, engineer and polymath. Von Neumann was generally regarded as the foremost mathematician of his time and said to be “the last representative of the great mathematicians”; he integrated pure and applied sciences.

Wheeler, John Archibald – [331 Pages, 96.3MB] – John Archibald Wheeler (July 9, 1911 – April 13, 2008) was an American theoretical physicist. He was largely responsible for reviving interest in general relativity in the United States after World War II. Wheeler also worked with Niels Bohr in explaining the basic principles behind nuclear fission. Together with Gregory Breit, Wheeler developed the concept of Breit–Wheeler process. He is best known for linking the term “black hole” to objects with gravitational collapse already predicted early in the 20th century, for coining the terms “quantum foam”, “neutron moderator”, “wormhole” and “it from bit”, and for hypothesizing the “one-electron universe”.

The post FBI Files: Scientists and Medical Professionals first appeared on The Black Vault.

A heavily redacted Department of Defense Office of Inspector General (DoD OIG) release made public on January 7, 2026, reveals a UAP-related whistleblower reprisal investigation centered on the revocation of classified access that was closed in February 2025. The records do not identify the complainant by name, but the chronology and subject matter overlap with publicly documented whistleblower filings that have been associated with former intelligence official David Grusch. The documents do not confirm that connection, but with the dates and information publicly available, the connection seems highly likely.

(Note: Grusch has repeatedly ignored past attempts by The Black Vault to contact him both via his attorney and close associates, so no additional attempts were made for this story. He is always welcome to contact The Black Vault to respond to a number of open questions.)

This document release was in response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by The Black Vault in April 2025 seeking DoD/IG complaints and reprisal investigations involving whistleblowers who reported UAP-related programs or technologies.

What the DoD IG Investigated

The DoD OIG report describes a reprisal complaint alleging that officials revoked the complainant’s eligibility for access to classified information and refused access to compartmented programs because of UAP-related reporting to the Inspector General.

The Executive Summary states:

“We conducted this investigation in response to a reprisal complaint alleging that officials at the [REDACTED] revoked [REDACTED] (the Complainant) eligibility for access to classified information and refused to grant him access to [REDACTED] compartmented programs. The complaint alleged that this was done in reprisal for reporting Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP)-related matters to the DoD Office of Inspector General (DoD OIG).”

The DoD OIG found the complainant “made four protected disclosures,” including one “to the DoD OIG,” with additional recipients redacted.

The Adverse Actions at the Center of the Complaint

The released report ties the reprisal allegation to specific clearance-related actions handled through the Consolidated Adjudications Facility (CAF), including the initial proposal to revoke access and the final revocation.

The report documents an August 29, 2022, notice:

“On August 29, 2022, the [REDACTED] CAF provided the Complainant an LOI and an SOR notifying him that it intended to revoke his eligibility for access to classified information… The notice also removed the Complainant’s access to classified systems and facilities and required him to relinquish his access badges and be placed on paid administrative leave pending the adjudication process.”

It further records the final revocation:

“On December 12, 2022, [REDACTED] signed the final letter of revocation, and on December 13, 2022, emailed the letter to the Complainant notifying him that the CAF revoked his eligibility for access to classified information.”

While the report confirms the existence of UAP-related protected disclosures, the substance of those disclosures is largely obscured by redactions.

The Bottom Line: “Not a Contributing Factor” and “No Recommendations”

The DoD OIG concluded that the protected disclosures were not a contributing factor to the initial intent to revoke and that the final decision would have been the same even if the disclosures had not occurred.

The report states:

“Therefore, we concluded that the Complainant’s protected disclosures were not a contributing factor in the CAF’s initial intent to revoke the Complainant’s eligibility for access to classified information.”

It adds that even after CAF personnel later learned the complainant was claiming whistleblower status, the outcome would not have changed:

“However, clear and convincing evidence established that [REDACTED] would have taken the same action absent the Complainant’s protected disclosures.”

What the Inspector General found was a contributing factor were substantiated findings of misconduct, which the report describes as independent of any whistleblower activity and sufficient, on their own, to justify adverse action. After those findings were developed, the investigation states that CAF was formally notified and conducted its own assessment. According to the report, “on receiving [REDACTED] findings, [REDACTED] reviewed the derogatory information, as well as the Complainant’s history, and felt a revocation was warranted in accordance with DoDM 5200.02.” The report further explains that this determination “was based on a pattern of misconduct,” and referencing a “pattern of behavior issues” underscoring that the decision was not tied to a single event or disclosure, but to cumulative conduct evaluated under established adjudicative standards.

The Inspector General also addressed whether the complainant was treated differently because of his whistleblower status and found no evidence to support that claim. In a section titled Disparate Treatment of the Complainant, the report states plainly, “We found no indication that [REDACTED] CAF personnel treated the Complainant disparately during their review and adjudication.” Testimony from CAF personnel and a review of comparable cases, the report continues, “indicated that nothing was unusual about the Complainant’s case or that he was treated disparately from any other [REDACTED] employee who was not a whistleblower.”

The investigation adds that “On receiving [REDACTED] findings, [REDACTED] reviewed the derogatory information, as well as the Complainants history, and felt a revocation was warranted in accordance with DoDM 5200.02.” It goes on to state that, “This was based on a pattern of misconduct, including the Complainants [REDACTED].”

While much of the underlying conduct and history remains obscured by redactions, the report repeatedly signals that additional, sensitive factors informed the outcome. Large portions of the analysis referring to the complainant’s conduct and history are withheld under privacy and national security exemptions, indicating that information materially relevant to the adjudication could not be publicly released without identifying the individual. Based on the totality of the evidence reviewed, including those redacted elements, the Inspector General concluded the disclosures themselves did not drive the decision, and the complaint was ultimately not substantiated.

Internal Messages Show Confusion Over the Whistleblower Claim and Optics Concerns

One of the more revealing windows into the case appears in redacted internal messages summarized in the findings. Those communications show CAF personnel questioning what, exactly, constituted whistleblowing in the first place, suggesting a disconnect between the clearance adjudication process and the reprisal allegation being asserted.

The report recounts an exchange dated September 29, 2022, including the following:

“On what grounds does [the Complainant]have for a whistleblower case. He didn’t blow any whistle or bring to light any info. What’s his grounds?”

A reply followed:

“I have no idea I have no information about any of that.”

Then came the line that underscores the uncertainty:

“[W]here is whistle blowing?!!! … [I]s there more out there we just don’t know about[?]”

Later communications reflect hesitation about timing and “optics,” including instructions to delay sending the revocation letter:

“[W]e haven’t gotten the OK … to do that[.] … [H]e’s claiming whistleblower status … and [REDACTED] doesn’t want the optics to be terrible[.]”

The report also notes a “stand down” directive tied to concerns about how the action could be perceived.

Those passages do not change the DoD OIG’s final conclusion, but they do document uncertainty and communication gaps inside the process at the time key steps were unfolding.

Return to Work and Restoration of Clearance

While the DoD Inspector General ultimately rejected the reprisal allegation, the report documents that the complainant’s security clearance was later restored through a formal appeals process and that he returned to work. According to the findings, after CAF revoked the complainant’s eligibility for access to classified information, he appealed the decision to the Personnel Security Appeals Board (PSAB). The report states: “On January 9, 2023, after the CAF revoked his clearance, the Complainant appeared before a Personnel Security Appeals Board (PSAB) and presented his appeal to the revocation.” The following day, the outcome changed. As the report records, “the PSAB overturned the original determination to revoke his eligibility for access to SCI, and that his TS/SCI was reinstated this date.”

The investigation further explains that the board’s decision was based on mitigation presented by the complainant rather than any whistleblower considerations. According to the report, during the PSAB hearing the complainant “provided compelling information on each of the other factors outlined in the SOR, which the board felt mitigated the security concerns.” As a result, “the board… voted unanimously to restore the Complainant’s security clearance.” The report also notes that appeals boards overturn revocations with some regularity, with one official estimating that reversals occur “one third of the time,” and stating that there was “nothing unusual about the Complainant’s case.”

Following the restoration of his clearance, the report documents the complainant’s return to duty. Under a section titled The Complainant’s Return to Work, investigators write that “after the Complainant returned to work with his restored security clearance,” officials resubmitted him for compartmented accesses in February 2023. The report states that while those submissions did not result in immediate access, supervisors attempted to reintegrate him into his position. One official told investigators that after the complainant returned to work in January 2023, he “tried to integrate the Complainant back into meaningful work.” The report also notes that the complainant was later formally debriefed on his security clearance status on March 22, 2023.

Taken together, the DoD OIG record shows that although the reprisal complaint was not substantiated and the clearance revocation was deemed justified at the time, the complainant ultimately regained his clearance through the established appeals process and returned to work. The report treats these events as procedurally separate from the whistleblower reprisal analysis, reinforcing the Inspector General’s conclusion that the protected disclosures themselves were not the driving factor behind the original adverse action.

Heavy Redactions and What the FOIA Exemptions Mean

The DoD OIG letter accompanying the release states that “an additional 44 pages are exempt from release in their entirety” and that the withheld material was determined in coordination with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).

Among the exemptions cited:

The DoD OIG invoked FOIA Exemption (b)(3) for information “exempted from release by statute,” citing 50 U.S.C. § 3024(i)(1) for intelligence “sources and methods,” 50 U.S.C. § 3024(m) for ODNI personnel identifying information, and 5 U.S.C. § 407 for “the confidentiality of employee complaints to the Inspector General.”

The release also relied on (b)(5) for deliberative process material, (b)(6) and (b)(7)(C) for personal privacy, (b)(7)(D) for confidential sources, and (b)(7)(E) for sensitive law enforcement information that could risk circumvention of the law.

The combined effect of these exemptions is substantial: identities, offices, and much of the UAP-related content are removed, limiting independent verification of the complainant’s narrative beyond the broad framework described by the DoD OIG.

The Grusch Question: What Can Be Proven From Public Sources and This Report

The released DoD OIG report confirms a UAP-related reprisal allegation tied to clearance access, investigated under a whistleblower reprisal framework, involving protected disclosures to the DoD OIG and subsequent adverse security clearance actions in 2022.

Public records and reporting associated with David Grusch describe a notably similar structure, but the available evidence does not conclusively establish that this DoD OIG case is his, mainly due to the name being redacted.

Despite that, there is supporting evidence suggesting this case directly relates to Grusch.

An unclassified procedural filing to the Intelligence Community Inspector General  associated with Grusch is dated May 25, 2022, and reflects a “DISCLOSURE OF URGENT CONCERN(S); COMPLAINT OF REPRISAL,” signed under penalty of perjury by “DAVID C. GRUSCH.”

The same filing states that Grusch “confidentially provided UAP-related classified information to the Department of Defense Inspector General (DoD IG)” and describes alleged retaliation and “numerous adverse security clearance actions” after those protected disclosures.

A 2023 report by The Debrief stated the Intelligence Community Inspector General found Grusch’s complaint “credible and urgent” in July 2022.

In sworn congressional context, a hearing document published on Congress.gov reflects Grusch describing reprisals and reporting the matter to an inspector general before filing a whistleblower complaint. Congress.gov

The Black Vault has also previously documented the May 25, 2022, date of the procedural filing and its general allegation of “adverse security clearance actions.”

The FOIA request that this case tied to, as filed by The Black Vault, did not specifically ask for, nor even mention, Grusch in any way. The exact wording of the request was:

“I respectfully request a copy of the following records: all Inspector General complaints, reprisal investigations, threat assessments, or disciplinary communications created from January 1, 2021, to present referencing whistleblowers within the Department of Defense or Intelligence Community who reported UAP-related programs or technologies. This includes, but is not limited to, complaints referencing retaliation for disclosures made to Congress or the media.”

In the responsive records, only one case came up, which indicates given the timeline above, this is most likely Grusch’s case he has made reference to in the past.

But beyond all that, what is arguably the most convincing evidence, though still not definitive proof, is the comparison of the redacted report just released by the DoD OIG, and the previously released, unclassified and un-redacted, “Disclosure of Urgent Concern(s) Complaint of Reprisal” submitted to the Intelligence Community Inspector General. The signature block comparison is below, which indicates it was likely the same law firm that drafted both documents, with a similar signature block structure, length, phrasing choices, and use of fonts.

The released DoD OIG records strongly indicate a UAP-related whistleblower reprisal dispute involving clearance access and protected disclosures. The public timeline and subject matter overlap with publicly available filings and testimony associated with David Grusch. However, the documents released by DoD OIG do not provide enough verifiable information to prove the complainant is Grusch, and the identity cannot be confirmed from this release alone.

Why This Release Still Matters

Even with heavy redactions, the report provides a rare, document-based look at how a UAP-related reprisal allegation moved through an internal national security adjudication and investigative pipeline. It also documents internal confusion about the whistleblower allegation and explicit concern about “optics” while clearance actions were pending.

The DoD OIG’s final position is unambiguous: the complaint was not sustained, and the clearance revocation would have occurred regardless of the protected disclosures.

###

Document Archive

FOIA Case DODOIG-2025-000932 [66 Pages, 8MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [7.81 MB]

The post DoD IG Releases Final UAP Whistleblower Reprisal Report first appeared on The Black Vault.

The primary document released is titled “Morning News of Note – 11 March 2018”, an unclassified briefing product forwarded to the Office of the Secretary of Defense and distributed within senior Department of Defense channels. The email itself is marked UNCLASSIFIED and appears to be part of a routine, standardized news aggregation prepared by OSD Public Affairs Research and Analysis.

The briefing is structured as a curated digest of major national security, defense, and geopolitical news, broken down into sections such as Top Stories, Defense Department, Air Force, Veterans, Asia/Pacific, and other regional or issue-based categories. The content is drawn almost entirely from mainstream media outlets including Reuters, The Washington Post, The New York Times, Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, Military.com, and regional newspapers.

The document reflects what senior defense leadership was exposed to in near-real time, rather than internal assessments or classified reporting. Its value lies in showing what issues were prioritized for awareness, not how those issues were internally analyzed.

One of the more notable features of the document is a dedicated “Tweets of Note” section. This section compiles verbatim social media posts from President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, cabinet officials, and members of Congress.

Among the highlighted tweets are President Trump’s statements on:

• Diplomatic engagement with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un
• Trade tensions involving China, the European Union, steel, and aluminum tariffs
• Missile testing claims related to North Korea
• Communications with foreign leaders including China’s President Xi Jinping and Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe

These tweets are reproduced directly, complete with timestamps and Twitter handles, underscoring that presidential social media statements were treated as official signals warranting inclusion in senior-level defense briefings.

Within the Air Force section, the document includes reporting on operational and readiness issues, including articles detailing:

• An “unprecedented spike” in cockpit oxygen and hypoxia-like incidents affecting T-6A trainer aircraft
• Maintenance concerns related to On-Board Oxygen Generating Systems (OBOGS)
• Congressional testimony and internal reviews addressing pilot safety and aircraft readiness

These selections reflect ongoing concerns at the time about aviation safety and training pipeline disruptions, issues directly relevant to Air Force leadership.

While the FOIA request targeted UAP-related keywords, the release does not include internal correspondence or direct discussions by General Wilson regarding UAPs. However, the broader compilation does include media commentary touching on unidentified aerial phenomena.

Notably, the document includes a Washington Post opinion piece by Christopher Mellon titled “The Pentagon isn’t taking UFOs seriously enough.” The article references Navy encounters with unidentified aircraft, declassified videos, and calls for a more coordinated intelligence response. Its inclusion demonstrates that UAP-related coverage in mainstream media was being tracked and surfaced to senior defense officials as early as March 2018, even if no internal commentary accompanied it.

Although the contents are largely composed of publicly available reporting, the document provides insight into:

• The information environment presented to senior military leadership
• The role of media monitoring in shaping situational awareness at the highest levels
• The normalization of presidential tweets as briefing material alongside traditional news reporting
• The presence of UAP-related media coverage within official defense digests, even absent classified analysis

In that sense, the release serves as a small but illustrative window into how external narratives—ranging from global conflict and aircraft safety to UFO reporting and presidential social media—were compiled and elevated within the Department of Defense.

###

Document Archive

Document: Morning News of Note – 11 March 2018 (UNCLASSIFIED) [71 Pages, 15MB]
FOIA Case: 24-F-0835
Source: Office of the Secretary of Defense / OSD Public Affairs Research and Analysis

This page functions primarily as an archival reference, documenting the scope and nature of material surfaced to senior Air Force and Department of Defense leadership during this period.

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [14.89 MB]

The post Department of Defense Morning News of Note – 11 March 2018 first appeared on The Black Vault.

In June 2009, then–Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid sent a letter to the Department of Defense requesting heightened protection for what he described as the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP). The four-page letter, addressed to then–Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn III, argued that portions of the program warranted Restricted Special Access Program (SAP) status due to sensitivity involving “unconventional aerospace-related findings,” advanced technologies, and national security implications.

The letter itself is no longer in dispute. After years of denials, confusion, and contradictory statements, the Department of Defense ultimately acknowledged its authenticity, and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) released the document publicly. What remains unresolved, even after more than six and a half years after a Freedom of Information Act request first sought it, is the Department of Defense’s response to Reid’s request.

A final FOIA response issued by the Office of the Secretary of Defense/Joint Staff on December 15, 2025, under case number 19-F-0948, again produced only Reid’s original letter, directing The Black Vault to the same DIA-hosted copy previously released years earlier. The response asserted that this constituted a “full grant” of the request and stated that no additional responsive records were found.

That conclusion directly conflicts with prior on-the-record statements from the Pentagon.

A Confirmed Response—But Still Missing

In 2021, Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough confirmed to The Black Vault that the Department of Defense did, in fact, respond to Senator Reid’s 2009 memo.

“I can confirm that the memo you’re referring to is authentic. DOD received it and responded to Sen. Reid,” Gough stated at the time. She added that her office could not release the response because “the Public Affairs office does not release Congressional correspondence.”

The statement strongly implied that a tangible written response existed and had been located. Yet, when specifically requested under FOIA, and after the scope of the request was amended to remove any ambiguity, the Department of Defense now maintains that no such response can be found.

That amendment was formally submitted in April 2020, explicitly asking that all responses to Senator Reid be included in the search. The Department acknowledged receipt of that amendment and confirmed it was incorporated into the case file.

Despite this, the final determination issued in 2025 claims that no response letter exists within the scope of records searched.

Procedures That Require a Written Answer

The unresolved absence of a response raises procedural questions that extend beyond AATIP itself.

Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 5400.04 governs the provision of information to Congress and requires that inquiries be answered in a “responsive and expeditious” manner, generally within 30 days. Additionally, DoD Manual (DoDM) 5110.04-M outlines the internal handling of congressional correspondence and requires that an initial reply or draft be prepared within 14 calendar days for leadership review.

Taken together, these procedures make clear that a written response to a sitting Senate Majority Leader, especially one requesting Special Access Program consideration, would not be optional or informal. At minimum, a written reply or draft response would normally be generated, staffed, and preserved.

The Department of Defense has not explained how such a response could have been sent, as confirmed by its spokesperson, yet leave no recoverable record across multiple offices years later.

A Program Still in Dispute

The missing response letter adds another layer to the long-running controversy surrounding AATIP itself.

On one side of the debate, Reid’s 2009 letter explicitly refers to AATIP as an existing program, describes work already underway, and requests additional security protections. The attached “Attachment 1” lists AATIP as an unclassified nickname, identifies preliminary funding periods, and names both government and contractor personnel associated with the effort.

On the other side, the Department of Defense has repeatedly stated that AATIP was not an official, standalone program and that Luis Elizondo, often described publicly as its director, “had no assigned responsibilities for AATIP while he was in OUSD(I).” That language was reiterated by Gough even while confirming Reid received a response.

The Department has characterized AATIP references as administrative or informal, while critics argue that such explanations do not reconcile with the detailed content of Reid’s memo or the apparent need for a formal Pentagon reply.

A Pattern of Difficulty

Compounding the issue is the unusual history of locating Reid’s original letter itself. For years, the Department of Defense stated it could not be found. It was later located and released by the DIA. Now, after more than six years of FOIA processing, the Pentagon again claims it cannot locate a closely related record that its own spokesperson has acknowledged exists.

Other correspondence between Senator Reid and the Department of Defense has been located and released without comparable difficulty. Only the response to the 2009 AATIP letter appears to fall into a category of persistent absence.

An Unanswered Question

Whether AATIP existed as a formal program, an informal effort, or something in between remains a matter of ongoing dispute. What is no longer speculative is that Senator Reid requested action, and the Department of Defense has stated it responded.

What remains unanswered is why, under procedures that require written congressional correspondence, no response can now be produced. It also begs the question on why this particular document continues to elude release long after the original request was filed.

Until that question is resolved, the 2009 AATIP letter remains not just a controversial document, but part of an incomplete paper trail at the center of one of the Pentagon’s most debated modern mysteries.

UPDATE – 5/18/2026

The Black Vault’s appeal of the above case has been granted:

Last year, I wrote how the Department of War couldn’t find any response to Senator Harry Reid’s 2009 AATIP letter, despite DoW spokeswoman Susan Gough confirming to The Black Vault there was one.

Today, the appeal I filed was granted (a win). What happens next? We will see! pic.twitter.com/eLWFBXhPSD

— John Greenewald, Jr. (@theblackvault) May 18, 2026

###

19-F-0948 FOIA Release Package [6 Pages, 0.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [574.24 KB]

The post Six and a Half Years Later, the DoD’s Reply to Harry Reid’s AATIP Memo Remains Missing first appeared on The Black Vault.

The DoW originally stated that no such memorandum was found, but the appeal has now been granted, and the case remanded for a new search.

An Unverified Claim and a Growing Controversy

In June 2023, the Wall Street Journal published claims that a directive from the Secretary of Defense’s office had been circulated across the military services “ordering the practice to stop immediately.” The article tied the alleged directive to a hazing ritual in which service members were falsely told that they were working on operations involving retrieved non-human craft.

The WSJ did not publish the memo, identify its specific date, or provide sourcing for the claim. Following publication, no document surfaced publicly, and no military component acknowledged knowledge of the directive.

In September 2025, the DoW stated in a formal FOIA response to The Black Vault that it had located no such memorandum. On October 1, when asked again about the WSJ claim, Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough stated, “Regarding the alleged memo: I cannot confirm the existence of any department-level memo as described in the article. You may want to ask the Air Force or other military services whether they put out such a memo to their personnel.” In the original email, the word “alleged” appeared underlined for emphasis.

The Air Force did not respond after a request for comment, and the FOIA case seeking information on the alleged “Yankee Blue” ritual is still open.

A FOIA Challenge to the Pentagon’s “No Records” Determination

The Black Vault’s FOIA request filed with the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) on June 17, 2025, sought a copy of any directive issued in spring 2023 ordering the halt of “Yankee Blue”-related practices or other activities involving fabricated claims of reverse-engineering non-human technology.

OSD searched solely within the Correspondence Management Division (CMD) and reported no responsive records.

A formal appeal was filed on September 17, 2025, arguing that the search was inadequate and not legally sufficient under FOIA. The appeal emphasized that:

• The Wall Street Journal presented the alleged memo as fact, not speculation, and attributed some related details to DoD spokesperson Susan Gough.

• FOIA requires agencies to conduct a search “reasonably calculated to uncover all relevant documents,” as established in Oglesby v. U.S. Dep’t of Army, 920 F.2d 57 (D.C. Cir. 1990).

• Limiting the search to CMD failed to meet that standard because a Secretary-level directive could reasonably reside in multiple offices, including policy directorates or the OSD Executive Secretariat.

• Agencies must pursue logical leads that emerge during the inquiry, under Campbell v. DOJ, 164 F.3d 20 (D.C. Cir. 1998).

• Any such memorandum from 2023 would fall under mandatory federal records retention, and its absence would raise records management concerns.

The appeal requested either a broadened search across all appropriate OSD components or a formal clarification as to whether the directive was ever issued at all.

The Appeal Decision: A Full Remand for New Searches

On December 12, 2025, the Acting Chief of the FOIA Division issued a written decision:

“After carefully considering your appeal, and as a result of discussions between FOID personnel and this office, I am remanding your request to FOID for a search for responsive records.”

The letter states that if any releasable records are found, they will be provided, and that the requester may appeal again should a future adverse determination occur.

The appeal victory does not confirm that the memo exists, will be found, or will be released. The decision establishes only that the prior search was insufficient under FOIA and that a renewed, expanded search is now required.

However, in the broader context, the remand highlights several unresolved inconsistencies:

• The WSJ reported a memo as fact, but has not addressed follow-up reporting by The Black Vault, provided a copy of the memorandum, or clarified sourcing.

• The DoW stated to The Black Vault in two separate channels through their FOIA office and Public Affairs office, that it could not confirm the memo’s existence, emphasizing the word “alleged” in their response from the latter.

• The appeal determination directly contradicts the prior FOIA conclusion that no responsive records existed, ordering a new search despite earlier categorical statements.

The result places the question back with the Pentagon: either locate the memo described by the WSJ, or formally resolve whether it was never issued at all.

###

Document Archive

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [290.04 KB]

The post Pentagon Reopens Search for Alleged “Yankee Blue” Memo After Initial Denial first appeared on The Black Vault.