The story first appeared on The Black Vault in the article “Secrecy Deepens About U.S. Army Agreement to Analyze UFO Material“ published on October 17, 2019. In it, The Black Vault outlined the initial revelations and the air of mystery surrounding the agreement. Despite TTSA’s press release announcing the CRADA, few details were available about the material involved or the specific goals of the research. This secrecy raised concerns that the public might never fully understand the scope of the collaboration. The article highlighted that the Army, despite being relatively open about some aspects of the agreement, did not disclose the nature or origin of the material it intended to study.

Months later, The Black Vault followed up with a second article titled “Army Confirms Testing UFO Debris; Secrecy May Loom for Years About Results,” published on March 4, 2020. This marked a significant milestone in public awareness, as the Army officially confirmed it was actively conducting tests on materials linked to UAPs, which it had obtained through TTSA.  The article also highlighted growing public frustration as little information was being shared about the testing process or the findings.

The Black Vault’s investigation into the Army-TTSA collaboration took another turn when the “Department of Defense Exempts Records on To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science“ article was published on January 25, 2021. This third installment revealed that the Department of Defense (DoD) invoked specific exemptions to block the release of CRADA-related documents through FOIA requests. These exemptions, notably those regarding national defense and foreign policy, cast doubt on whether the public would ever have full access to the results or documentation related to the tests conducted under the CRADA.

Together, these three articles document the evolving but highly restricted public knowledge of the Army-TTSA agreement. The agreement initially sparked hope that the Army’s involvement would bring scientific scrutiny and transparency to the investigation of UAP materials. However, over time, it became apparent that the Army’s testing would remain largely shielded from public view, with secrecy surrounding the results and the materials involved growing deeper.

The Black Vault, through numerous FOIA requests, has continued to press for the release of material generated by the CRADA. This dedicated archive serves as a repository for all related documentation, reflecting the ongoing battle between transparency and government secrecy in matters related to UAPs and UFO research in relation to this CRADA. Each document obtained adds another piece to the puzzle, but the full picture of what the Army and TTSA discovered remains elusive.

The Black Vault negotiated a “rolling release” with the Army, and the first package was released on October 23, 2024. It is unclear how much more information will be released, and when, but the Army has assured The Black Vault it continues to process the records as quickly as possible. This page will be updated as those additional releases are received.

Document Archive

FA-24-0006

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [8.38 MB]

FA-23-0015

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [3.68 MB]

FA-21-0064

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.81 MB]

The post Army and To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science: Unveiling the Secrecy Behind the UFO Material Testing Agreement first appeared on The Black Vault.

The image above is a fictional representation of the Army’s holdings.

Below, you can download the Excel Spreadsheet files of about 500,000 items in the Army’s historical artifacts collection.

Document Archive

File names are as released by the U.S. Army:

The post Center for Military History, Department of the Army, Historical Artifacts Database first appeared on The Black Vault.

Modernization of Army shown on TV series — “The Sharper Sword and Stronger Shield” (TV-449) is an informational film which emphasizes the importance for the continual modernization of the Army for effective national defense. The film portrays the Army’s efforts to forge “A Sharper Sword and Stronger Shield” to preserve the peace or win a future war. The presentation describes the pentagonal organization and structural flexibility of the modern Army, new tactical concepts, and technological advancements in weapons and equipment. The presentation then goes on to show the new type of Army weapons, both nuclear and conventional, and the latest developments in air and ground equipment. It describes their use in carrying out the major elements of the modern tactical concept — dispersion, firepower, mobility, communications and surveillance, and support. A simulated task force then demonstrates the employment of new combat techniques, weapons, and equipment.

National Archives Identifier
2569709

Local Identifier
111-TV-449

The post The Big Picture: The Sharper Sword And Stronger Shield first appeared on The Black Vault.

This document appeared on eBay, and had no information other than the title and a price tag of $1,000,000.

So, The Black Vault chased it through FOIA. It was received, and is now archived below, in full.

Document Archive

Extra-Terrestrial Warfare by Robert Suggs, June 1965, Combat Operations Research Group [19 Pages, 3.2MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [3.15 MB]

FOIA Response Letter

The post Extra-Terrestrial Warfare by Robert Suggs, June 1965, Combat Operations Research Group first appeared on The Black Vault.

In November 1969, Stanley R. Resor, Secretary of the Army, and General William C. Westmoreland, U.S. Army Chief of Staff, directed Lieutenant General William R. Peers, U.S. Army, to “explore the nature and scope of the original Army investigations of what occurred on 16 March 1968 in Son My Village, Quang Ngai Province, Republic of Vietnam.” This collection of materials, commonly known as the “Peers Inquiry,” which provides the results of General Peers’ investigation of the “My Lai incident”— later also known as the “My Lai massacre”— is divided into four volumes: the report, witness testimonies, exhibit materials, and CID [U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command] statements.

The following documents were obtained from the Library of Congress.

Document Archive

Volumes 1-5 Complete .zip Download (All files below, searchable, are included) [862MB]

Volume I – The Report of the Investigation [395 Pages, 25.6MB] – Volume I of the Peers Inquiry contains the narrative report of the investigation. The report, which is divided into twelve chapters and two annexes, includes the 29 March 1969 letter from Ronald L. Ridenhour reporting the incident to the Secretary of Defense, the mission statement of the Inquiry, findings and recommendations, maps, an extensive table of contents, and a 26-page glossary.

Volume II – Testimony [18,163 Pages, 633MB] – Volume II of the Peers Inquiry, entitled “Testimony,” is further subdivided into a series of “books,” and is comprised of approximately 20,000 pages of testimony and summaries of testimony by over 350 witnesses.

Volume III – Exhibits [2,419 Pages, 208MB] – Volume III of the Peers Inquiry, entitled “Exhibits,” is further subdivided into a series of seven “books” containing all the supporting documents that were officially entered into the inquiry record. These documents include directives, statements, overlays and sketches, administrative memoranda, aerial maps and photographs, and operational and after-action reports. A small number of pages in the PDF version of the “Exhibits” series are illegible due to the poor quality of the original documents.

Volume IV – CID Statements [543 Pages, 32MB] – Volume IV of the Peers Inquiry contains CID statements received prior to the submission of this report. Only those considered to be relevant to this inquiry have been included. Also considered were the CID statements summarizing the interviews of Vietnamese civilians and military personnel. Although the Vietnamese testimony was of some value to this investigation, the inclusion of their statements in the report was not considered essential. The names of these Vietnamese and other non-Vietnamese personnel interviewed by the CID have been included.

The post The Peers Inquiry Report: Department of the Army Review of the Preliminary Investigations into the My Lai Incident first appeared on The Black Vault.

The post Redstone Arsenal Through the Years (Produced in 2003) first appeared on The Black Vault.

The following document is titled: Cantonment Areas: Study Using Urban Pattern, Study of Dispersed Layout, Study of Disruptive Patterns. Revision.

It was listed on a large database of still classified documents from the 1940s.

Document Archive

Cantonment Areas: Study of Urban Patterns, Dispersed Layouts and Disruptive Patterns – May 1942 [16 Pages, 2MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [2.10 MB]

The post Cantonment Areas: Study of Urban Patterns, Dispersed Layouts and Disruptive Patterns – May 1942 first appeared on The Black Vault.

The following documents were obtained from the U.S. Army (FOIA Case #143F-97) by The Black Vault via the Freedom of Information Act in January of 1997. It was received in a batch of records, wherein the request was for documents relating to UFOs. The entire request yielded more than 350 pages, and at the top of the stack, was this record.

It was a declassified file folder labeled “Flying Saucers from Denmark.” Within that folder, believed to be from 1947 or 1948, according to the “dossier index sheet,” the folder contained only photographs. It is believed based on the file folder’s subject, that these photos are of debris of some kind, related to a “flying saucer” case in Denmark.

Although interesting in itself, The Black Vault met a UFO witness now more than 20 years ago, by the name of Bob White. He reached out based on these documents being posted.

Bob had a UFO experience back in 1985, which resulted in a fragment or piece of something from the craft that zipped off into the sky during the encounter to fall to the ground. Bob had recovered that piece, and has had it ever since.

After posting these documents on The Black Vault in the 1990s, Bob along with Larry Cekander (partner in the “UFO Hard Evidence” research project) reached out to introduce themselves. They told me they had a piece of material from a UFO encounter that looked identical to the debris found in the photos from the Army, and the folder labeled “Flying Saucers of Denmark.”

As a television producer and writer, I had re-created and told Bob’s story on the History Channel in a documentary called “UFO Hunters,” a one-hour special that preceded the series of the same name. That video clip can be seen here on the History Channel’s website.

Although skeptics have tried to explain away Bob’s piece, one fact remains. Bob was telling his story since 1985, more than a decade prior to the Army declassifying the files. If Bob was hoaxing his case, and his piece of evidence was easily explainable as some skeptics contend, what are the odds that nearly FOUR DECADES PRIOR to his experience, the US Army had classified photos of an object that looked identical, and it was connected to a “Flying Saucer” case in another country?

Here is a comparison of the objects:

I will let you all decide what this connection means. You can find the Army records below.

Document Archive

Flying Saucers from Denmark, UFO Debris Photos, Circa 1947 [21 Pages, 3.3MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [3.50 MB]

The post Flying Saucers from Denmark, UFO Debris Photos, Circa 1947 first appeared on The Black Vault.

Artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) is a next-generation computer capability that holds the potential for changing everything from how people live and work to how wars are fought and won. The Combat Capabilities Development Command Chemical Biological Center (DEVCOM CBC) is keeping pace with this computing revolution through its Grand Challenge Program, beginning with three pilot projects and a workshop to recruit more.

Video Archive

The post U.S. Army Lab Explores AI/ML Potential in Development of Chemical Biological Defense Solutions first appeared on The Black Vault.

The hypnotic interview is recommended as a viable procedure and a useful tool in aviation accident investigation. In the case study presented, an Army aviation accident investigation board for the first time accepted into evidence information obtained in a hypnotic interview. The hypnotic interview provided the board with evidence which was not previously obtained by other investigative techniques and which proved to be invaluable in the investigative and decision making process. The evidence suggested mechanical failure in a specific component, which laboratory testing later confirmed. The accident investigation board reversed the original opinion of “pilot error” to a unanimous decision of “mechanical failure”. The defective component would not have otherwise been discovered without the evidence from the hypnotic interview.

Document Archive

Hypnosis in Army Aviation: A Case Study, 1978 [14 Pages, 6.2MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [6.41 MB]

The post Hypnosis in Army Aviation: A Case Study, 1978 first appeared on The Black Vault.

According to the research program’s abstract:

“The specific aim of the research program was to examine the feasibility of controlling the behavior of a dog, in an open field, by means of remotely triggered electrical stimulation of the brain. The report describes such a system which depends for its effectiveness on two properties of electrical stimulation delivered to certain deep lying structures of the dog brain: the well-known reward effect, and a tendency for such stimulation to initiate and maintain locomotion in a direction which is accompanied by the continued delivery of stimulation. Experiments on the parameters of stimulation are described, in addition to an experiment on the ability of a conventional reinforcer, food, to disrupt ongoing, free field behavior under the control of rewarding brain stimulation. Finally, supporting research employing albino rats is summarized. (Author)”

One document was released by the CIA in late 2018 after a FOIA request by The Black Vault. The document, redacted in some parts with details missing, highlighted the research of creating remote control dogs using implants on the brain.  The record’s release was specifically highlighted by Newsweek, which as a result, was picked up by many other outlets.

After months of research, I tracked down a much cleaner copy of the document at the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC), which contained NO redactions (therefore, new details about the research have emerged) but also much clearer copies of the photographs. In addition, more reports related to the program have been uncovered, all linked below.

Document Archive

Remote Control Behavior with Rewarding Electrical Stimulation of the Brain, 1965 (Remote Controlled Dogs), Final Report [103 Pages, 11MB]  (For comparison, here is the CIA’s 2018 release:  C00021825.pdf)

Open Field Control of Dog Behavior by Remote Brain Stimulation, 1 January 1964 – 1 January 1965, Annual Report [18 Pages, 1MB]

Some Behavioral Correlates of Brain-Stimulation Reward: Part B, 1 January 1963 – 1 January 1964, Annual Report [29 Pages, 2.1MB]

The post Remote Control Behavior with Rewarding Electrical Stimulation of the Brain, 1965 (Remote Controlled Dogs) first appeared on The Black Vault.

On October 17^th, 2019, public-benefit corporation To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science (TTSA) issued a press release that they created an agreement with the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (CCDC) to “advance materiel and technology innovations.” This collaboration is called a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement or CRADA (pronounced CRAY-DUH). Details were scarce in the original press release, but The Black Vault was quickly able to contact the Army; secure a copy of the CRADA agreement; and then publish it the next day. Now, the U.S. Army seems to be a bit less forthcoming about releasing detail, as they denied the release of numerous documents that were requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that may have shed additional light on the research.

The U.S. Army’s 2019 release of the CRADA to The Black Vault offered a glimpse into what it was about. “To the Stars Academy of Arts and Science is a company with material and technology innovations that offer capability advancements for Army ground vehicles,” the agreement outlined. “[TTSA] will share their discoveries with CCDC Ground Vehicle Systems Center Ground Vehicle Survivability and Protection (GVSP), who will use Government laboratories and resources to characterize the technologies and find applications on ground vehicles.”

Metamaterial Mystery

The ‘material’ referenced in the agreement ties into the acquisition of numerous pieces of metamaterial by TTSA. On September 27, 2018, TTSA issued a press release outlining that they had, “… collected seven pieces of material, from multiple sources, to study for The ADAM Research Project.  Each sample represents different elements of potential Unidentified Aerial Phenomena and how they operate.” (It should be noted that the number of pieces acquired by TTSA has grown since the original publication of their 2018 press release.)

Metamaterials are defined as material that is structured and does not resemble anything that naturally occurs. There are many uses of metamaterials being explored today, which include them being used for medical devices, aerospace applications, solar power, communication and even invisibility cloaking.

There are mixed feelings by investors about the collaboration with the Army.  Danny Silva, an investor who blogs about TTSA related issues, including metamaterials, posts his work on his site called the Silva Record and is fully supportive of the agreement. “Many of us are disclosure advocates and we don’t care if disclosure comes from the government, TTSA, the invisible college, The Black Vault or anywhere else. We just want the truth out, no matter what it is. No matter how great or how ugly it is,” Silva told The Black Vault. “It’s amazing that the Army is interested in seeing what TTSA can come up with. It’s positive movement for the UFO subject as a whole.”

Arthur Iglesias, an investor from the United Kingdom, told The Black Vault, “[I’m] very happy with it. CRADAs were designed to speed the commercialization of technology,” he said.  “It provides a support network that will empower TTSA and it’s efforts.”

Attorney and TTSA investor Nathan Hendrickson has also has kept a close eye on TTSA and the developments with their acquired pieces of metamaterial. He was not surprised that they wanted to analyze the pieces they had collected in a professional manner; however, he was dismayed at the involvement of the Army. “TTSA sending metamaterials to the Army isn’t what they implied they were going to do a couple of years back,” Hendrickson opined. “The inference was all of this stuff, their research, their technology, was going to be for the public good and benefit.”

TTSA appears to understand the concerns of the general public, and their shareholders, but they stand by their decision that the Army will provide them exactly what they need to get to the bottom of the mystery.

The Black Vault spoke directly with the team of spokespeople at TTSA about these concerns, and in response, they referenced their “Frequently Asked Questions” section of their website to alleviate any worry the general public may have. “The U.S. Army’s positive response to the high-profile nature of this agreement and To The Stars Academy’s mutual approval to publicly release the details of the CRADA displays the willingness and desire to be transparent with the public,” the page reads. “As a technology leader, the U.S. Government can provide exceptional resources to accelerate testing and analysis that otherwise would be cost-prohibitive to a start-up the size of To The Stars Academy.”

The FOIA and Corporate Secrecy

Immediately after the CRADA was published by The Black Vault in 2019, multiple FOIA requests were filed to dig deeper into what it was all about. This included seeking communications between TTSA and the Army about the agreement. A second asked for e-mails that were sent either to or from Dr. Joseph Cannon, one of the principal investigators for the Government, which talked about TTSA. These requests would likely offer insight into the full objectives behind the agreement, including potentially new revelations or even clues about the material testing.

However, each document discovered by the Army as responsive to these requests; were denied in full.

“There are twenty-nine (29) emails totaling one hundred (100) pages,”  CCDC FOIA Officer and Records Manager Joy L. Linton told The Black Vault. Linton cited FOIA exemptions (b)(4) and (b)(5) to withhold the records, which are respectively explained as “trade secrets and commercial or financial information” and “privileged communications with or between agencies, including those protected by deliberative process privilege.”

TTSA investor Hendrickson is let down at the Army’s response to The Black Vault’s FOIA request, but not surprised. “I don’t like it, but that’s the nature of the military beast. While I’m glad that these mysterious metamaterials are being looked at by professionals, it’s frustrating in that it looks like [TTSA has] a five year contract with the Army, so we aren’t going to get any information on these materials for at least five years, if not more, if ever.”

Silva also felt it was nothing out of the ordinary, but believes TTSA will be forthcoming about the results in the end. “The FOIA denials stating the ball is in TTSA’s court I would assume are somewhat standard. That doesn’t surprise me,” he explained. “Plus, the CRADA has just begun. Only time will tell how TTSA chooses to proceed IF the tests come back positive, anomalous, or whatever they might be. I don’t think it’s fair to speculate, but eventually I would expect the public would hear something from TTSA if the results are interesting.”

Iglesias is positive, but actually feels secrecy may be warranted if TTSA shields the results. “I feel like they would share relevant scientific information with the public and the scientific community,” he outlined.  “[But I] don’t think they will share information that could empower potential competitors in the future.”

When TTSA was asked by The Black Vault about sharing the results with the public; details were not forthcoming. “We cannot comment on when and where results will be published in the future, but TTSA is committed to responsible reporting that upholds the highest standards of reliability and integrity,” they said in a statement.

Whatever is found during the testing of the metamaterials, it may take years until it is revealed to the public. According to Army Regulation 70–57, which governs all actions taken when it comes to CRADAs, “… the results of tests performed with services made available by an Army laboratory, center, range, or other testing facility for the testing of materials, equipment, models, computer software, and other items are confidential and may not be disclosed outside the Federal Government without the consent of the persons for whom the tests are performed.”

Doug Halleaux, Public Affairs Officer for the Army’s CCDC GVSC, reinforced the fact that the Army would not be releasing information any time soon. In a statement to The Black Vault, Halleaux said that, “As a general rule, we try not to release details on collaborative work until the work itself has reached a conclusion. This keeps us from giving a false impression about the work being done, or what results may develop.”

This means that the Army won’t be releasing any additional information through FOIA, or their public affairs office, on the CRADA. The release of additional details, test results or even the long-shot possibility that at least one piece of metamaterial is a piece of an extraterrestrial spacecraft will all rely on TTSA’s willingness to release it to the general public.

To add to the increasing level of secrecy surrounding the agreement, those investigators and first-hand witnesses who own the pieces of metamaterial that are currently in the possession of TTSA, have found themselves under an oath of silence. It was discovered that when The Black Vault reached out to at least one person related to the metamaterial(s) in 2019 for comment, they were unable to speak on the record regarding anything related to their agreement. Anything related to the testing results on their piece(s); the updates on where it was at; or facts about the full arrangement were all locked down as they were asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). It is believed that most, if not all, of those individuals involved with supplying pieces of the metamaterial have signed the same.

According to TTSA, prohibiting the owners/witnesses of the metamaterial from talking is a “common practice” to protect respective Intellectual Property (IP). TTSA told The Black Vault in a statement that, “NDAs are common practice for organizations to protect intellectual property, including the prevention of premature announcements or proclamations by third parties that are yet to be thoroughly analyzed, independently verified and responsibly communicated.”

The CRADA Today

It has now been nearly 5 months since the CRADA was first announced by TTSA. With a planned five year arrangement between the Army and TTSA, it is unclear what the actual timetable for testing is.

Out of the number of pieces TTSA has acquired, will all of them be tested? When will they be tested? When will the results be available? Many questions linger.

At this point, the public is being told very little. FOIA channels; Army public affairs; and TTSA itself have not produced anything about the testing or the results (if any exist). According to the CRADA, it is not until September of 2020, when the first milestone review takes place, but it is still unknown when the actual testing will occur prior to that date.

When the Army was asked by The Black Vault about the status of metamaterial testing, or if testing began, the answer was simple: “I don’t know…” Halleaux told The Black Vault.

When TTSA was asked the same; they had nothing to add either. “TTSA doesn’t have any new information to share at this time on the testing of the materials, outside of what was included in the CRADA FAQ,” they said. “That’s the latest.”

But What If?

But what if the testing results turn out to show irrefutably, that at least one of the pieces being tested is extraterrestrial? Some investigators and researchers within the “UFO Community” have long believed that the military is complicit and they play a large role in the overall UFO cover-up. So, it seems strange that a corporation aiming to end that secrecy, would choose the military as one of the first outside their own organization, to be privy to the test results.

In other words, if this all really does turn out to be “alien”; how will the Army react?

According to the Army, they are not even interested in the potential “alien” aspect. The Army sent statements to The Black Vault in 2019, and reiterated the same sentiment for this article in 2020, that it just doesn’t matter to them about the origin; they just want to see if it will benefit them.

Army spokesperson Hallieux said, “As far as the materials — the Army’s interest is in the potential for novel materials and exploring the edges of materials science, any speculation as to their origin is (pardon the pun) immaterial. Our team is always excited to look at something new, whether it’s materials or technologies, capabilities or processes.”

If you’re reading this and have a budding concern that if that “what if?” scenario plays out, then the U.S. Army will take the metamaterials and classify it in the interest of national security; you’re probably not alone. When TTSA was asked to respond to that concern; they declined. Rather, they referred again to their FAQ page on the website, which reinforces the intent of transparency, but does not address any potential risk of classification or confiscation should a national security concern arise on the side of Uncle Sam.

Regardless of that risk, it may not even matter. In the eyes of the FOIA and Army regulation, we likely will not be hearing anything from the Army any time soon. For now, it all seems to be solely reliant on TTSA’s willingness to share their information with the public.

The question now — is will they?

###

Freedom of Information Act Denial

Full Statements Provided to The Black Vault

To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science

1) When will the public be informed about test results? In what manner? (TV Show, press release etc.)

“We cannot comment on when and where results will be published in the future, but TTSA is committed to responsible reporting that upholds the highest standards of reliability and integrity.”

2) I did learn about the non-disclosure agreements that those had to sign who loaned and/or sold pieces of metamaterials to TTSA. Is there a reason why TTSA required NDA’s?

“NDAs are common practice for organizations to protect intellectual property, including the prevention of premature announcements or proclamations by third parties that are yet to be thoroughly analyzed, independently verified and responsibly communicated.”

3) I believe the consensus at TTSA is that the military is part of a) ignoring the UAP threat (I am in full agreement) and b) part of essentially a cover-up regarding the topic.  That said, can I ask why TTSA feels the U.S. Army is the best place to take the metamaterials for testing and “showing your cards” so to speak to the military first?

“This topic is covered by TTSA’s CRADA FAQ here: http://dpo.tothestarsacademy.com/blog/crada-faq”

4) Is there a concern that if the material tested at the CCDC comes back with indications that it is extraterrestrial – the US Army may classify the finding in the interest of national security?

“This topic is covered by TTSA’s CRADA FAQ here: http://dpo.tothestarsacademy.com/blog/crada-faq”

5) Has TTSA begun testing on materials? If so, can any details or test results be shared?

“TTSA doesn’t have any new information to share at this time on the testing of the materials, outside of what was included in the CRADA FAQ. That’s the latest.”

Nathan Hendrickson, TTSA Investor

(Quotes were submitted after a telephone conversation. No written questions were submitted to Mr. Hendrickson.)

“I’ve known since before last year’s shareholder meeting that one of TTSA’s goals was to get their own lab. They said as much at the meeting itself, so the CRADA announcement came as no surprise.”

“While I wish that any metamaterials could be analyzed by ‘one of us’ so to speak with any results immediately released to the public, The fact is that none of us own our own lab capable of doing sophisticated metallurgical research, along with the research staff and infrastructure to support it. We also don’t own our own space and air radars, sonars, etc. The very nature of what we are talking about almost requires some type of state sponsorship unless a major private university is willing to step up.”

“TTSA sending metamaterials to the Army isn’t what they implied they were going to do a couple of years back. The inference was all of this stuff, their research, their technology, was going to be for the public good and benefit. It seems that as time has gone on, TTSA has now morphed their primary mission into being a defense sub-contractor, at least as far as metamaterials goes.”

“While I’m glad that these mysterious metamaterials are being looked at by professionals, it’s frustrating in that it looks like they have a five year contract with the Army, we aren’t going to get any information on these materials for at least five years, if not more, if ever.”

“It’s not surprising that the Army FOIA responses are flaccid. I don’t like it, but that’s the nature of the military beast. I do wish that TTSA had a better public and/or investor relations team to better communicate the current state of the various projects within TTSA, including the metamaterials.”

Danny Silva, TTSA Investor

1) As an investor, are you happy about the agreement with the Army and TTSA?

“I invested minimally in TTSA. More as a donation than as an investment. Some may say that effects my reporting, but to think I have spent all this time, including blood sweat and tears, just to get a return on a small investment is ridiculous. I’d invest in Vallee/Nolan (who are also testing materials) if I was able to. Many of us are disclosure advocates and we don’t care if disclosure comes from the government, TTSA, the invisible college, The Black Vault or anywhere else. We just want the truth out, no matter what it is. No matter how great or how ugly it is.

Before the CRADA some critics were saying TTSA was only an entertainment company. It’s amazing that the Army is interested in seeing what TTSA can come up with. It’s positive movement for the UFO subject as a whole.”

2) Do you feel the Army / military is the best place to take potential pieces of a UFO that may turn out to be one of the biggest discoveries of mankind?

“TTSA may be trying to utilize what resources they can. Since the Army has in essence offered to share or donate resources, I think that’s great. We have to remember how much money and effort it takes to do what they are attempting. Since all of us…reporters, bloggers, fans, investors and members of the UFO community (etc.) are not running similar endeavors, trying to test multiple samples comprehensively, or spending the lump sums to do so, I’m not sure we would have an accurate idea of where the best place to take potential or alleged pieces of a UFO would be. Most people and groups don’t have the access, money, time and support. Even some scientists seem to struggle with this.

I think a fair question to ask is, “Would TTSA have entered the CRADA if they had billions of dollars to invest on their own?” I don’t know the answer to that, but will try to find out in the future. I don’t, and neither do many of us, know the pluses and minuses the CRADA brings from an intimate standpoint. We are looking in as outsiders.”

3) Do you have concerns that *IF* there is an extraterrestrial connection behind any of the pieces, do you fear the Army may classify it in the interest of national security and confiscate it?

“It’s a general concern for people, however, when you dig deeper I believe there is wording in the CRADA and in TTSA public statements guarding against this. I would hope it’s not the case. TTSA seems to be in control of the findings on their end. Let me get a little conspiratorial and speculate. If the goal was to swallow this up, why enter a public CRADA in the first place? Wouldn’t this research have been done quietly behind the scenes from the get go? I’m aware of different critiques and (conspiracy?) theories about why the CRADA has happened. They range from unfair to valid questions. Listening to everything helps me know what avenues to explore. Maybe more concerns will be addressed in time.”

4) I recently received denials seeking information from the Army under the Freedom of Information Act. They denied all communications with TTSA, about TTSA, and information about the CRADA as privliged information and corporate secrets. I also have quotes from the Army backed up by official regulation, that test results will not be released without the permission of who the agreement is with. In this case, TTSA has to make the call to release information, it appears. Do you feel TTSA will immediately share the information with the public? In what way?

“The FOIA denials stating the ball is in TTSA’s court I would assume are somewhat standard. That doesn’t surprise me. Plus, the CRADA has just begun. Only time will tell how TTSA chooses to proceed IF the tests come back positive, anomalous, or whatever they might be. I don’t think it’s fair to speculate, but eventually I would expect the public would hear something from TTSA if the results are interesting.”

5) In the process of covering TTSA, I learned they made all of the ‘owners’ of the metamaterials sign non-disclosure agreements, so none of them can talk about results or go on the record about their piece(s) they have acquired. Do you agree with that level of secrecy?

“I haven’t heard this is the case, however, I haven’t looked into it, so it may be accurate. I can try to look into this in the future on my end. If people are asked to sign NDAs, some seem to be breaking them. I’ve reported on people claiming to have given TTSA material samples and these people are talking about it publicly, on the record. I’ve later been able to confirm their claims. If they are signing NDAs, not everyone is following them. If NDAs are being signed, since I’m not in the position of carrying out a similar endeavor, I wouldn’t expect to have an accurate opinion on this and be in a place to say whether I agree or disagree with it. I would speculate that TTSA, and possibly the Army, might not want parties making announcements on their behalf. They could be trying to safe guard against this. Although like I said, it doesn’t seem to be working in every case.”

6) How do you think this entire saga will turn out? What do you feel the test results on the metamaterials will reveal, if we are to learn what they are?

“The individuals behind the aliases in Dr. Pasulka’s book “American Cosmic” seemed to be somewhat confident the artifacts they had were special. Right or wrong, that level of confidence is exciting. Minus Tom DeLonge, we haven’t seen statements that blatant coming from the rest of TTSA. TTSA have stayed pretty conservative.

Overall, I’m not sure how it’s going to play out. I can only speak about what some of the UFO community are hoping for. First, we have to remember that TTSA isn’t the only group testing material. I think that’s great. If TTSA doesn’t succeed, then maybe Vallee/Nolan or some other group will, or vice versa. What the UFO community wants is this to be some sort of proof that “we” can take to the public to convince them of the phenomenon, or at least that something odd is going on. A secondary hope is that it can be back engineered or otherwise utilized for good. If the Army gets access to this and possibly also uses it to strengthen, or give an edge to our military, I don’t think it should be viewed as a bad thing. Especially if it saves lives of our troops. If the United States doesn’t do it, surely other countries won’t think twice before they do. And on the other side TTSA can release findings on their own.

I am concerned that test results will come back what some consider positive and the public still won’t accept it. Somewhat similar to what we have seen with the Nimitz encounters. Overall, the Nimitz encounters have had an amazing effect on the world and changed everything, but they weren’t the smoking gun, “game over” scenario they should have been, as far as public perception goes. Too many people have never heard of the Nimitz encounters. (But the battle to get the public aware of the Nimitz encounters is far from over.)

We know from the history of the UFO community, politics, and current human behavior in general, when the results come back everyone will be debating what they mean.

There is another very possible scenario; none of the materials come back as special. Or they come back odd/interesting but inconclusive. At least with multiple groups testing materials it seems we may be getting the best of all worlds, as far as the approaches go. This is an exciting time. If the results come back inconclusive it will be disappointing, but not a dealbreaker. However, if the results come back positive…we are living in a new world.”

Arthur Iglesias, TTSA Investor

1) As an investor, are you happy about the agreement with the Army and TTSA?

“Yes, very happy with it. C.R.A.D.A.S were designed to speed the commercialization of technology, it provides a support network that will empower TTSA and it’s efforts.”

2) Do you feel the Army / military is the best place to take potential pieces of a UFO that may turn out to be one of the biggest discoveries of mankind?

“Yes I do. The army answers to the President and the president answers to the People (at least in principle, right). So if you want to keep this democratic, you got to go through Government. If there’s potentially a National Security issue to the topic, then the military is the right place to go.”

3) Do you have concerns that *IF* there is an extraterrestrial connection behind any of the pieces, do you fear the Army may classify it in the interest of national security and confiscate it?

“Not really. The army would not go at it with a CRADA if it had intentions of concealing this. If they suspect it might be ET, then they seem to be ok with bringing that forward. Surely not every little sordid detail about it, but the CRADA tells me they’re ok with having that conversation.”

4) I recently received denials seeking information from the Army under the Freedom of Information Act. They denied all communications with TTSA, about TTSA, and information about the CRADA as privliged information and corporate secrets. I also have quotes from the Army backed up by official regulation, that test results will not be released without the permission of who the agreement is with. In this case, TTSA has to make the call to release information, it appears. Do you feel TTSA will immediately share the information with the public? In what way?

“I feel like they would share relevant scientific information with the public and the scientific community, as that is one of the points of CRADA deals. I wouldn’t expect them to address the E,T. question tho, as they can’t answer for the government. And don’t think they will share information that could empower potential competitors in the future also.”

5) In the process of covering TTSA, I learned they made all of the ‘owners’ of the metamaterials sign non-disclosure agreements, so none of them can talk about results or go on the record about their piece(s) they have acquired. Do you agree with that level of secrecy?

“I agree. Once TTSA endorses a material, it has to protect itself as a company. If the properties of these materials are of proprietary value, then it makes sense they would be under NDAs.”

6) How do you think this entire saga will turn out? What do you feel the test results on the metamaterials will reveal, if we are to learn what they are?

“I think this will end up with TTSA demonstrating antigravity. That’s what they expect to be able to do with this CRADA. They have a decent physics theory that explains it and allows for it to exist (courtesy of Hal Puthoff) to go along with their findings. From that point on, the ball is down in Trump’s court.”

Doug Halleaux, Public Affairs Officer for the Army’s CCDC GVSC

1) The denial from the Army essentially locks the public out of seeing anything relating to the agreement via FOIA. Can you comment on these types of (b)(4) and (b)(5) denials? (I am not framing this as any type of cover-up. Rather, I am showing it’s rather normal to protect corporate secrets. I just am seeking a line or two from the Army justifying it).

“I really have to defer to my colleague and the FOIA officer who actioned your request, Joy Linton, on this one. As a general rule in Public Affairs, we try to release everything that’s applicable that we can (and have in our possession) that would otherwise be releasable under FOIA. For us, transparency is no small issue, and it saves everyone time, to boot. Again, none of this is intended to directly address information that wasn’t releasable through the FOIA, but to provide context to the FOIA release exemptions.”

2) Have there been any tests done yet under this CRADA? Is there any update the Army can share about the agreement? When results are available, does the Army have any plans to release information on how the test results will be/can be applied to Army technology? If so, how?

“I’ll address each in turn.. Have there been any tests done yet under this CRADA? I don’t know yet. As a general rule, we try not to release details on collaborative work until the work itself has reached a conclusion. This keeps us from giving a false impression about the work being done, or what results may develop.

Is there any update the Army can share about the agreement? The CRADA itself remains unchanged since its signing.

When results are available, does the Army have any plans to release information on how the test results will be/can be applied to Army technology? I don’t have an answer to this, and I probably won’t know what we’ll be able to release, if anything, until the conclusion of the collaboration. If we do have information to release, it’ll be through our standard mechanisms– we develop a news release, post it to DVIDS (www.dvidshub.net), Army.mil (www.army.mil), and direct-send to our media lists (which you’re on). From a Public Affairs perspective, it doesn’t do us a whole lot of good to release information, hoping that nobody sees it!”

3) The material being tested at the Army’s labs is continued to be touted as pieces from UFOs or Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs). This, obviously, has created a lot of controversy and questions. Previously, you had stated: ” As far as the materials– the Army’s interest is in the potential for novel materials and exploring the edges of materials science, any speculation as to their origin is (pardon the pun) immaterial. Our team is always excited to look at something new, whether it’s materials or technologies, capabilities or processes.” Is there any update/amendment/addition I can add as to the Army’s stance of such claims. Again, the speculation comes not from the public or media, but rather, the organization that the Army has the CRADA with, which is why I am seeking the Army’s stance on the claims of origin. (One source of the claim from TTSA: https://dpo.tothestarsacademy.com/blog/material-of-interest-magnesium-zinc-bismuth)

“No change here– our position remains the same. As a general statement, our scientists and engineers have a passionate curiosity that serves the Army, and their disciplines, extremely well.”

The post Secrecy Deepens About U.S. Army Agreement To Analyze UFO Material first appeared on The Black Vault.

According to the agreement, these are the objectives:

PARTNER [Lockheed Martin] Benefit: The potential benefit to PARTNER includes the knowledge, insight and recommendations gained from the sharing of data, information and experiences with NSRDEC under this JWS. 

NSRDEC Benefit: The potential benefit to NSRDEC includes the knowledge, experience and data gathered during PARTNER internal and third-party evaluation and analysis of its HULC and FORTIS systems (including without limitation its FORTIS-KSRD system) and subsystems and related products designed to improve Soldiers’ load carriage abilities and/or reduce muscular and/or skeleton fatigue. Execution of this JWS will provide NSRDEC with continued exposure and knowledge of system and subsystems pertaining to advanced exoskeleton technology, which may have a benefit to the warfighter.

Document Archive

CRADA for Domestic Technology Transfer Between U.S. Army RDECOM and Lockheed Martin, 2018 [38 Pages, 18.2MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [18.07 MB]

The post CRADA for Domestic Technology Transfer Between U.S. Army RDECOM and Lockheed Martin, 2018 first appeared on The Black Vault.

The major purposes of the work done under this present grant were twofold: (a) to extend the Investigation begun by Dr. Dittborn of the relation between suggested sleep and hypnotizability as measured by standardized test procedures and assessed by clinical ratings , and (b) to familiarize Dr. Dittborn with procedures developed in our laboratory for the evaluation of hypnotizability with a view toward future research, taking advantage of the clinical facilities available to Dr. Dittborn in Chile. Further experience with experimental procedures formed an integral part of the second aim.

While the many similarities of interest between Dr. Dittborn and those at our laboratory initially suggested a program of research along broad lines in the areas of differing states of consciousness not primarily associated with hypnotic procedures, it soon became apparent that this would be less likely to result in specific experimental results than the planning of several studies designed to answer specific questions more limited in nature. These could then provide both substantive findings as steps for future research and Important methodological experience useful for the furtherance of that research.

Document Archive

An Empirical Investigation of Trance Phenomena, Final Report, May 1968 [35 Pages, 8.4MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [8.29 MB]

The post An Empirical Investigation of Trance Phenomena, May 1968 first appeared on The Black Vault.

ATP 3-21.51 provides doctrinal guidance and direction for all brigade combat teams (BCTs) and their subordinate elements conducting subterranean operations. The principal audience for ATP 3-21.51 is all members of the profession of arms. Commanders and staffs of Army headquarters serving as joint task force (JTF) or multinational headquarters should also refer to applicable joint or multinational doctrine concerning the range of military operations and joint or multinational forces. Trainers and educators throughout the Army will also use this publication.

Document Archive

Subterranean Operations, Army Techniques Publication No. 3-21.51, November 2019 [228 Pages, 17MB]

The post Subterranean Operations, Army Techniques Publication No. 3-21.51, November 2019 first appeared on The Black Vault.

This document, obtained from the Army Research Lab (ARL), lists the facilities and capabilities available at the lab. This is the same lab which made headlines, having signed an agreement with To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science, which it believed that metamaterials that came from UAP will be tested there. In a November 2019 interview with Linda Moulton Howe, a previous owner of one of the metamaterials, she stated that it is possible the Army laboratory will be able to do the proper tests with a Terahertz generator to see if the metamaterial could defy gravity.

Document Archive

(Click image for higher resolution)

The post Army Research Lab (ARL) Facilities and Capabilities first appeared on The Black Vault.

To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science (TTSA), a public benefit corporation led by rock star Tom DeLonge, announced a collaborative agreement with the U.S. Army this week. The original press release sent out by TTSA was vague, and offered few details. However, the Army spoke with The Black Vault to discuss the agreement, and offer a copy of the entire document, nearly in full (understandably, a few phone numbers were removed for privacy reasons).

The news broke on October 17, 2019, wherein TTSA stated in a press release, “[TTSA] announced today a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command [CCDC] to advance TTSA’s materiel and technology innovations in order to develop enhanced capabilities for Army ground vehicles.” The press release continued,  “TTSA will share its discoveries with Ground Vehicle System Center (GVSC) and Ground Vehicle Survivability and Protection (GVSP) and the U.S. Army shall provide laboratories, expertise, support, and resources to help characterize the technologies and its applications.”

Doug Halleaux, Public Affairs Officer for the Army’s CCDC GVSC, responded to The Black Vault with statements and a copy of the executed agreement. In addition, on behalf of the Army, he helped address still lingering questions about the overall situation, though some still remain.

“TTSA has a set of different materials, the properties of which they’re interested in investigating the properties. As materials research in general is of key interest to Army research, the Army is interested in any insights gained from investigating the properties of these materials, too,” Dr. Halleaux stated in an e-mail to The Black Vault. “In this case, the Army is providing the expertise and facilities to analyze the materials, and TTSA is providing the materials themselves; both parties receive the results of the analysis. Just as there is no financial compensation to TTSA for the use of the materials, there is no financial compensation to the Army for the use of the facilities.”

Although TTSA has its share of supporters, it is the part about “sharing” with the military that got other members of the social network universe up in arms.

TTSA has had a primary message that the military is hiding information about UAPs, and that has resonated with many of their fans along with their investors. However, now that TTSA has allegedly acquired physical pieces of the “phenomena,” to some, they are now just walking it all back through the doors of the military and sharing the discoveries with those they claim are hiding secrets from the public. Although TTSA did not respond to questions submitted by The Black Vault, the Army did weigh in on how they may benefit from the research results, and what they thought about the provenance of the material itself.

“As far as the materials– the Army’s interest is in the potential for novel materials and exploring the edges of materials science, any speculation as to their origin is (pardon the pun) immaterial. Our team is always excited to look at something new, whether it’s materials or technologies, capabilities or processes,” said Dr. Halleaux. “As materials research in general is of key interest to Army research, the Army is interested in any insights gained from investigating the properties of these materials, too. In this case, the Army is providing the expertise and facilities to analyze the materials, and TTSA is providing the materials themselves; both parties receive the results of the analysis. Just as there is no financial compensation to TTSA for the use of the materials, there is no financial compensation to the Army for the use of the facilities.”

Attorney and TTSA investor, Nathan Hendrickson, is not surprised by the news. “I knew that at the last shareholder meeting, TTSA was discussing their desire to own their own lab. One of the constant gripes has been the high cost of lab testing meta-materials,” Hendrickson told The Black Vault. “It appears that they have solved this problem by letting the US Army test their material so long as the Army gets to see and use any results.”

Although this news was expected by attentive shareholders, at least one of them is not keen on the apparent secrecy involved with the news. Hendrickson added, “While I am glad that a high-end Army research facility is going to look at the metal, I would’ve never known this by reading the TTSA press release. I wish I didn’t have to rely on others to do the investigating to answer questions that the company should be answering. In keeping with military tradition, TTSA is very ‘coy’, and that is infuriating to me.”

As for the metamaterial currently in the possession of TTSA, some of it is referenced as being “on loan” in recent SEC filings.  The Black Vault reached out to someone associated with at least one of the pieces in TTSA’s possession, seeking comment on the news about this new agreement.  This person requested they remain anonymous, and respectfully declined to comment due to the fact they signed a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) with TTSA, which prohibits them from doing so.

This arrangement between TTSA and the Army is clearly unclassified. However, that seemingly does not take away from many elements of secrecy surrounding the agreement.  Until curators of some of the material are able to talk; TTSA answers looming questions; and peer-reviewed scientific results are published… we may just be left to wonder on what is now going on inside Army laboratories.

The Agreement

U.S. Army Releases CRADA with To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science [26 Pages, 7MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [7.22 MB]

Full Quotes from the Army Used Above

Initial Statement:

A CRADA is a mechanism for cooperative work between a government agency and another agency, either internal to the government or external, non-government.  Our colleagues at Army Research Lab have a pretty good synopsis on their website (https://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?page=14) but CRADAs aren’t limited to ARL, they’re used across the various government R&D agencies and facilities.  In essence, a CRADA brings together researchers for truly cooperative work between the agency and its partner without an exchange of funds, property, or other exchanges that would otherwise require a traditional contracting mechanism.  Typically, CRADAs are used for out-of-the-box type work or leading-edge technologies where both parties have an interest in conducting research together for mutual information or investigatory benefit.  An example I like to use is the CRADA that the Army enjoys with General Motors, specifically with regards to Fuel Cell research.  General Motors’ Fuel Cell technologies are of interest to the Army, and the Army’s experience with off-road vehicles and operation is of interest to GM; the CRADA between the two afforded an opportunity to investigate the use of Fuel Cells for rugged, austere, off-road environments, providing insights that both GM and the Army benefit from.

A CRADA isn’t an endorsement mechanism– just as the Army doesn’t endorse General Motors or any other automobile manufacturer, the Army also doesn’t endorse its other cooperative partners.  Specific to the To The Stars Academy CRADA, TTSA has a set of different materials, the properties of which they’re interested in investigating the properties.  As materials research in general is of key interest to Army research, the Army is interested in any insights gained from investigating the properties of these materials, too.  In this case, the Army is providing the expertise and facilities to analyze the materials, and TTSA is providing the materials themselves; both parties receive the results of the analysis.  Just as there is no financial compensation to TTSA for the use of the materials, there is no financial compensation to the Army for the use of the facilities.

CRADAs can be built with just about any external entity within the limits of the law and reason, and when there’s an interest to both parties to do so.  The Army forms CRADAs after careful consideration of the cost to the Army in terms of time and resources to the mutual research and the potential value to the Army of the research results.

Follow Up Statements:

As far as the materials– the Army’s interest is in the potential for novel materials and exploring the edges of materials science, any speculation as to their origin is (pardon the pun) immaterial.  Our team is always excited to look at something new, whether it’s materials or technologies, capabilities or processes. 

The post U.S. Army Releases Agreement with To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science first appeared on The Black Vault.

A major objective of the study was to develop procedures by which a dog handler can control the direction of off-leash movement of his dog by remote means in an unrestricted environment. Several dogs were successfully conditioned to respond to a tone signal to change direction and to make excursions of one-half mile or more under the control of terrain stimuli and of tone signals transmitted by radio. Automated procedures to train dogs to change direction in response to a tone were developed; in these procedures the learning contingencies of reinforcement were arranged by a computer control system. The learning of other scout dog skills is described in terms of sub-programs consisting of small, easy-to-learn steps.

Document Archive

Remote Control of War Dogs (Remotely Controlled Scout Dog), June 1974 [55 Pages, 4.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [4.29 MB]

The post Remote Control of War Dogs (Remotely Controlled Scout Dog), June 1974 first appeared on The Black Vault.

The Projecting Electronic Ray appears to have been an invention first created around 1936. It was a contract by the U.S. Army and an inventor by the name of William Marchant / Marchant Associates, Inc. Apparently, the inventory could not fulfill his part of the contract, so it was terminated. In December of 1950, the Director of the CIA, Walter Smith, ordered an evaluation of the invention.

The “ray” was supposed to ultimately be capable of delivering powerful electronic energy to a distance in excess of a few hundred yards to cut trees, minerals and metals, and to destroy life by conversation of a sharply tuned electronic ray into heat.

Below, you will find all the records received under the FOIA.

Document Archive

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)

 The Projecting Electronic Ray Documents [25 Pages, 3.4MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [3.20 MB]

The post The Projecting Electronic Ray Weapon, 1930s – 1950s first appeared on The Black Vault.

In recent years, Iran strengthened its regional and global position through a wide array of alliances, spreading from Latin America to the borders of Israel. This has been done as to enhance /rants role as a regional leader, and to undermine efforts to halt its nuclear project. Within this strategic context, Iran had developed prominent ties with the Lebanese “Hezbollah” and the Gaza based “Hamas”.

Such ties pose a continuous challenge to stability in the Middle East, and disrupt the prospects of peace talks between Israel and moderate Palestinians. If a wide armed conflict breaks out due to an attempt to foil/rants nuclear project by force, these alliances might pose a serious military challenge. Such a challenge would be more serious to Israelis than to a non-regional observer, who would by nature see it as a secondary issue.

The paper will look at the contemporary challenge posed by those organizations, using the historic perspective of the Soviet revolution as a raw model. Forced by the necessity to form a new balance of power in the Middle East as a result of such a conflict several courses of action will be examined, and one will be recommended.

Document Archive

 Proposed Courses of Action Versus Hamas and Hezbollah, January 2, 2011 [26 Pages, 6.5MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/dtic/SCARLPR122M16010509420.pdf

The post Proposed Courses of Action Versus Hamas and Hezbollah, January 2, 2011 first appeared on The Black Vault.

On March 3, 2017, I requested the Congressional Budget Justification document for FY2018.

Some agencies have not completed their document, but many claim they are posting them publicly when they are available.  However, on March 15, 2017, I received what I believe is a denial to the request. It is a bit unclear what they are referring to, but they do cite FOIA Exemption (b)(5), claiming the information is “Privileged communications within or between agencies, including those protected by the: ‘1. Deliberative Process Privilege (provided the records were
created less than 25 years before the date on which they were requested.’)”

A segment of the response can be seen here:

It is a bit unclear to what “unique” year in the budget world they are referring to.

Document Archive

 Army Denies Access to Congressional Budget Justification citing “… the unique FY17 and FY18 year in the budget world” [5 Pages, 1.8MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/army/ARMY-Budget2018-Denial.pdf

The post Army Denies Access to Congressional Budget Justification citing “… the unique FY17 and FY18 year in the budget world” first appeared on The Black Vault.

The DoD OIG conducted this audit, the third in a series of audits on property accountability in support of OIR, to determine whether the Army had effective controls for processing and transferring ITEF equipment to the Iraqi government. The audit found that Army commands documented procedures for processing and transferring ITEF equipment to the Iraqi government. However, the 1st Theater Sustainment Command did not have effective controls to maintain complete visibility and accountability of the ITEF equipment in Kuwait and Iraq prior to transfer to the Iraqi government, and could not provide complete data for the quantity and dollar value of equipment on hand, including rolling stock and ammunition. As a result, the 1st Theater Sustainment Command did not have accurate, up-to-date records on the quantity and location of ITEF equipment on hand in Kuwait and Iraq, and did not have effective controls because it did not use centralized systems to maintain visibility and accountability of ITEF equipment. Instead, the 1st Theater Sustainment Command relied on multiple spreadsheets developed by different commands in both Kuwait and Iraq to provide it with visibility and accountability of equipment and did not consistently account for equipment in Iraq.

The DoD OIG recommended that the Commander, 1st Theater Sustainment Command, use automated systems to account for and provide complete visibility of ITEF equipment. The Command agreed with the recommendation and initiated steps to implement corrective actions.

Objective

The document states the objective of this investigation as:

We determined whether the Army had effective controls for processing and transferring Iraq Train and Equip Fund (ITEF) equipment to the Government of Iraq.

This is the third in a series of audits on property accountability in support of Operation Inherent Resolve. ITEF, created by the FY 2015 National Defense Authorization Act, assists the Government of Iraq to combat the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Examples of ITEF equipment provided to the Government of Iraq include body armor, navigation sets, magazine pouches, ambulances, and cargo trucks.

The Army’s 1st Theater Sustainment Command (1st TSC) maintains visibility and property accountability of ITEF equipment until transferred to the Government of Iraq.

Findings

Army commands documented procedures for processing and transferring ITEF equipment to the Government of Iraq. For example, the 1st TSC developed a standard operating procedure that includes step-by-step instructions for processing and transferring ITEF equipment. However, the 1st TSC did not have effective controls to maintain complete visibility and accountability of ITEF equipment in Kuwait and Iraq prior to transfer to the Government of Iraq.

Equipment visibility provides users with equipment location, movement, and status. Army Regulation 735-5 states that all property acquired by the Army will be continuously accounted for from the time of acquisition until the ultimate consumption or disposal of the property.

However, the 1st TSC could not provide complete data for the quantity and dollar value of equipment on hand, including rolling stock and ammunition. Rolling stock refers to vehicles. Examples include Mine Clearance Systems, ambulances, and wrecker trucks. 

The 1st TSC did not have effective controls because it did not use centralized systems to maintain visibility and accountability of ITEF equipment. Instead, the 1st TSC relied on multiple spreadsheets developed by different commands in both Kuwait and Iraq to provide it with visibility and accountability of equipment and did not consistently account for equipment in Iraq.

As a result, the 1st TSC did not have accurate, up-to-date records on the quantity and location of ITEF equipment on hand in Kuwait and Iraq. Accurate, up-to-date records of equipment on hand in Kuwait and Iraq are critical for filling equipment requests. The process to contact multiple commands and reference multiple spreadsheets to determine equipment quantities and location could delay the fulfillment of a request or delay the development of future requests. In addition, not having accurate records of equipment on hand could result in duplicate equipment requests. Further, the use of manually populated spreadsheets increased the risk for human-error when inputting and updating equipment data.

Document Archive

 The Army Did Not Implement Effective Controls To Maintain Visibility and Accountability of Iraq Train and Equip Fund Equipment, September 14, 2016 [27 Pages, 2.9MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/dod/DODIG-2016-00799.pdf

The post The Army Did Not Implement Effective Controls To Maintain Visibility and Accountability of Iraq Train and Equip Fund Equipment, September 14, 2016 first appeared on The Black Vault.

The vast expansion of the nation’s armed forces just prior to and during World War II led to the establishment in 1940 of command and control organization for the U.S. Army which had been envisioned much earlier by military planners. Indeed, the concept actually had been enacted into law in the National Defense Act of 1920. General Headquarters (GHQ), U.S, Army, which was established in 1940, was soon troubled by conflicts between its training, responsibilities and the command and control of the ground combat troops and their supporting forces.

These functions, however, were separated in 1942 when a general reorganization of the War Department retained command and control of the ground combat troops at the departmental level, while assigning responsibility for training to the troops to the newly established Army Ground forces (AGF).

With the cessation of hostilities in 1945, the recommendations of both the Patch and Simpson Boards resulted in combining these functions once again in the Army Ground Forces structure.

This attempt at combining the functions as short-lived, at best, since a general reorganization of the redesignated Department of the Army in 1948 established the office of the chief of Army Field Forces (OCAFF) as the training arm of the Army. OCAFF was, in reality, a staff agency of the Department of the Army and was not a legitimate separate command.

The Document

 Operation STEADFAST Historical Summary. A History of the Reorganization of the U.S. Continental Army Command (1972-1973) [319 Pages, 13.6MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [12.97 MB]

The post Operation STEADFAST: U.S. Army Reorganization, 1972-1973 first appeared on The Black Vault.

Now that the Department of Defense has permitted the use of social media for both private and official purposes, the question becomes, can the military, the Army in particular, obtain the benefits sought from social media use without seriously compromising individual and operations security?

Answering this question required an initial assessment of Army goals and objectives to determine why the Army risked the use of social media, which revealed two reasons immediately.

First, the Army needed social media to communicate its inform and influence activities more effectively. Second, social media was the primary means by which soldiers maintained contact with their friends and family and, consequently, became a significant element in maintaining soldier morale.

If the Army did not need social media to distribute its inform message, it might have avoided the difficulties created by the personal use of social media by soldiers. Thus, the security risk posed by the use of social media cannot be reduced to a simple enforcement of operations security rules.

Nevertheless, soldiers who are not trained to avoid the disclosure of classified or sensitive information will, through their ingrained habits, present a significant security risk. Bottom line, all military personnel require training on appropriate use of social media now.

The Document

 Social Media and the U.S. Army: Maintaining a Balance, by MAJOR Todd A. Moe, May 2011 [49 Pages, 0.7MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/army/2013-68.pdf

The post Social Media and the U.S. Army: Maintaining a Balance, by MAJOR Todd A. Moe, May 2011 first appeared on The Black Vault.

The U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command is the Army’s medical materiel developer, with responsibility for medical research, development, and acquisition and medical logistics management. The USAMRMC’s expertise in these critical areas helps establish and maintain the capabilities the Army needs to fight and win on the battlefield.

The Report

 Annual Historical Report, 2014, US Army Medical Research and Materiel Command [1,036 Pages, 62MB]

The post Annual Historical Report, 2014, US Army Medical Research and Materiel Command first appeared on The Black Vault.