The DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms (or DOD Dictionary) sets forth standard US military and associated terminology to encompass the joint activity of the Armed Forces of the United States. These military and associated terms, together with their definitions, constitute approved Department of Defense (DOD) terminology for general use by all DOD components.

This publication supplements standard English-language dictionaries and standardizes military and associated terminology to improve communication and mutual understanding within DOD, with other US Government departments and agencies, and among the United States and its allies.

This publication applies to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Services, the Joint Staff, combatant commands, DOD agencies, and all other DOD components. It is the primary terminology source when preparing correspondence, to include policy, strategy, doctrine, and planning documents. Criteria for inclusion of terminology in the DOD Dictionary is enumerated in Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) 5025.12, Standardization of Military and Associated Terminology, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction (CJCSI) 5705.01, Standardization of Military and Associated Terminology.

DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms

Current as of May 2022 (released November 2022)

 DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, May 2022 [361 Pages, 119MB]

Archived Versions

 DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, November 2019 [376 Pages, 1.5MB]

 DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, October 16, 2016 [400 Pages, 1.7MB]

The post DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms first appeared on The Black Vault.

This publication has been prepared under the direction of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It sets forth joint doctrine to govern the activities and performance of the Armed Forces of the United States in joint operations, and it provides considerations for military interaction with governmental and nongovernmental agencies, multinational forces, and other interorganizational partners. It provides military guidance for the exercise of authority by combatant commanders and other joint force commanders (JFCs), and prescribes joint doctrine for operations and training. It provides military guidance for use by the Armed Forces in preparing and executing their plans and orders. It is not the intent of this publication to restrict the authority of the JFC from organizing the force and executing the mission in a manner the JFC deems most appropriate to ensure unity of effort in the accomplishment of objectives.

Document Archive

Joint Publication 3-50: Personnel Recovery [281 Pages, 3.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [3.72 MB]

The post Joint Publication 3-50: Personnel Recovery first appeared on The Black Vault.

The CEO of the corporation, Tom DeLonge, said in an Instagram post (which he later deleted) that he worked up an “established credibility” between TTSA and OSD. 

The Black Vault then filed a second time for documents on TTSA within OSD, having previously been told no records existed in 2018.

They found four pages within OSD that dealt with TTSA. Every page was not releasable as they said they were all about a “decision making process” or known as exemption (b)(5).

The previous “no record” response could still have been legitimately “no records.” Why? I submitted it in October of 2017 on a hunch after seeing Luis Elizondo, and his testimony, claiming to be a former employee of OSD. OSD’s denial was in August of 2018. The four pages could theoretically have been created after August 2018.

What’s it all mean and what’s in the four pages?

Is it about the CRADA? Is it about the UAP Video Leak investigation? Who knows… It will, for now, remain a mystery.

###

The post Department of Defense Exempts Records on To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science first appeared on The Black Vault.

This directive establishes policy, provides procedures and assigns responsibilities for the planning, development, programming, direction, execution, and control of overt psychological operations conducted by the Department of Defense in peacetime and in contingencies short of declared war.

Document Archive

DOD Directive S-3321.1 – Overt Psychological Operations Conducted by the Military Services in Peacetime and in Contingencies Short of Declared War [6 Pages, 2.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [2.67 MB]

The post DOD Directive S-3321.1 – Overt Psychological Operations Conducted by the Military Services in Peacetime and in Contingencies Short of Declared War first appeared on The Black Vault.

Office of the Secretary of Defense personnel responsible for deciding the realignment or closure of military installations based on the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) data calls and National Security Agency management personnel should read this report. The report discusses the validity, integrity, and supporting documentation of the data provided by the National Security Agency to assist the Secretary of Defense in BRAC 2005 recommendations.

Document Archive

National Security Agency Data Call Submissions and Internal Control Processes for Base Realignment and Closure 2005, May 13, 2005, Report No. 05-INTEL-10 [30 Pages, 5.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [5.71 MB]

The post National Security Agency Data Call Submissions and Internal Control Processes for Base Realignment and Closure 2005, May 13, 2005, Report No. 05-INTEL-10 first appeared on The Black Vault.

The imagery here was published by the Department of Defense on CD-ROM back in 2004 by the Defense Visual Information, now called Defense Visual Information Distribution Service (DVIDS). I archived the contents of their collection below.

There was no captions available, so it is a completely random set. All photographs are public domain, as they are works of the U.S. government as produced by the U.S. military.

Photograph Collection

The post Operation Iraqi Freedom, DOD Official Photograph Collection, January 2004 – July 2004 first appeared on The Black Vault.

This comprehensive list of intelligence abbreviations and acronyms includes those used presently, as well as those in use for approximately the last ten years. Sources for this list include the last DIA Lexicon published in 1991, numerous glossaries from Unified Command and Combat Support Agency documents, and contributions, from the faculty of the Joint Military Intelligence College. The expansion of any item may vary somewhat from one organization to another, but this list will hopefully contribute to greater standardization.

Document Archive

Defense and Intelligence Abbreviations and Acronyms, Joint Military Intelligence College [253 Pages, 0.6MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [814.21 KB]

The post Defense and Intelligence Abbreviations and Acronyms, Joint Military Intelligence College first appeared on The Black Vault.

This clip is a compilation of three declassified videos released by the Department of Defense. The official captions are compiled below for reference:

Video #1: Upon exfiltration of the target compound, U.S. forces employ precision munitions from a U.S. Remotely Piloted Aircraft to destroy the compound and its contents.

Video #2: Following a raid on a compound in Syria occupied by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, U.S. special operations forces deploy precision munitions from a U.S. remotely piloted aircraft to destroy the compound and its contents, Oct. 26, 2019.

Video #3: Remotely piloted aircraft footage shows the effects of precision munitions deployed from a U.S. remotely piloted aircraft to destroy the compound formerly occupied by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in Syria, Oct. 26, 2019.

Raw Video File

SyriaCompoundDestruction.mp4 (80MB)

The post The Destruction of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s Compound (Three Video Compilation) first appeared on The Black Vault.

Beginning in 1969, the Journal of Defense Research (JDR) has published defense related classified research, development and experimentation. The intent is to selectively rake available the peer refereed results of classified research and to serve as an archival Journal of this information to be used by future researchers.

Below, you will find various documents released about this publication.

Document Archive

Cumulative Index of the Journal of Defense Research papers, 1969 – 1983 [65 Pages, 16.8MB]

Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Journal of Defense Research (JDR), August 27, 1985 [20 Pages, 1.1MB] – The task force concludes that pursuant to some changes the Journal of Defense Research (JDR) should be continued. The JDR is ‘mission essential’ as a classified research tool: is not duplicated by available source as DTIC; and does not present an unacceptable security risk. With respect to security issues and concerns about duplication with the DTIC data bases, our findings are base upon recommendations made to the task force by the Deputy Administrator, DTIC; and the Principal Director, Counter-Intelligence and Security Policy. As scientists and engineers engaged in research for the Department of Defense, the task force recognizes the mission essential nature; that is, the utility and uniqueness of an achieved, referred journal. Being the only classified journal of its type, the JDR is used to communicate ideas amongst the defense community and is a basic tool for researchers. Almost every professional discipline, including law, medicine, the physical sciences, etc., uses referred, archived journals such as the JDR as a fundamental research tool.

The post Journal of Defense Research first appeared on The Black Vault.

The following documents have been released by the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff.  They include all correspondence between members of Congress, and their office.

Document Archive

Congressional Correspondence Logs

Congressional Correspondence Log, 2007 and 2009 [1,011 Pages, 199.6MB]

Congressional Correspondence Log, 2012 [368 Pages, 69.8MB]

All Congressional Correspondence Letters

Incoming congressional correspondence (all Members) February 2009 – July 2009 – Document Release 1 [361 Pages, 192.8MB]

Incoming congressional correspondence (all Members) February 2009 – July 2009 – Document Release 2 [265 Pages, 141.8MB]

Incoming congressional correspondence (all Members) February 2009 – July 2009 – Document Release 3 [147 Pages, 79.7MB]

The post Congressional Correspondence with the Office of the Secretary of Defense first appeared on The Black Vault.

The following is a list of DoD Instructions currently obtained under the FOIA.  Not all instructions are released to the public on the DoD website, and once received are archived here.

DoD Instruction 0-2000.22 – Title and Date Unknown [19 Pages, 4.2MB] – Although I appealed the complete redaction of this record, it was denied again after my appeal was granted. The explanation from that case was:

“The Under Secretary of Defense for Policy conducted an additional review of the responsive record in response to your appeal. Captain Thoms A. Ryno, Counterterrorism Policy Director, Irregular Warfare & Defense Counterterrorism office, in his capacity as an Initial Denial Authority, has determined that the 29 pages are withheld in their entirety pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(7)(e), techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of law; and (b)(7)(f), withholding of law enforcement-related information which could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual. Please note that we have considered the foreseeable harm standard when reviewing records and applying exemptions under the FOIA in the processing of this request.”

DoD Instruction 0-3100.11 – Illumination of Objects in Space by Lasers, March 31, 2000 [12 Pages, 2.7MB]

DoD Instruction 0-3144.07 – Signals Intelligence (SIGINT), November 19, 2010 [20 Pages, 2.3MB]

The post DoD Instructions first appeared on The Black Vault.

This was an information paper that was found during a 2014 FOIA request to CENTCOM. At the time, I requested the following:

“I respectfully request a copy of all documents, electronic or otherwise, that pertain to orders to military personnel and contractors, about how they are expected to observe Ramadan and how they are supposed to act in other countries during this time.”

CENTCOM forwarded the below pages to OSD/JS for review and release, and I was sent them on September 8, 2017.

(See also: NSA Observance of Ramadan)

Document Archive

Combat Operations in the Global War on Terrorism during Ramadan, 2001 [8 Pages, 1.1MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/dod/17F0758_DOC_02_Combat_Ops_During_Ramadan-Slides_10-23-2001.pdf

The post Combat Operations in the Global War on Terrorism during Ramadan, 2001 first appeared on The Black Vault.

BRAC 2005 is the formal process outlined in Public Law l 01-51 0, “Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990,” as amended, under which the Secretary of Defense may realign or close military installations inside the United States and it’s territories. As part of BRAC 2005, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics issued, “Transformation Through Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC 2005) Policy Memorandum One-Policy,
ResponsibilitiesJ and Procedures,” April 16, 2003, which stated that the DoD Office of Inspector General would review the accuracy ofBRAC data and the certification process.

The BRAC 2005 process was mandated for the United States and its territories and was divided into the following data cal ls- capacity analysis, supplemental capacity, Military value, Cost of Base Realignment Actions, Joint Process Action Team Criterion Number 7, and scenario specific. The Intelligence agencies’ collection process was divided into the following data calls- capacity analysis and Military value, and scenario specific.

This report summarizes the data calls as of April 2005, for the Defense Intelligence Agency BRAC 2005 process. The Defense Intelligence Agency, located in Washington DC, is a member of the National Intelligence Community and a primary producer of foreign military intelligence. The Defense Intelligence Agency was required to perform t·he capacity analysis, Military value, and scenario specific data calls. The DIA was responsible for collecting data from the Joint Intelligence Commands and the Joint Reserve Intelligence Centers. which were required to perform only the capacity analysis and Military value data calls.

Document Archive

 Defense Intelligence Agency Data Call Submissions and Internal Control Processes for Base Realignment and Closure 2005, May 13, 2005 [33 Pages, 5.7MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/dod/05-INTEL-09.pdf

The post Defense Intelligence Agency Data Call Submissions and Internal Control Processes for Base Realignment and Closure 2005, May 13, 2005 first appeared on The Black Vault.

This report is the first in a series of reports that discuss the acquisition of the Chemical Demilitarization Program (the Demilitarization Program). The mission of the Demilitarization Program is to destroy chemical munitions through incineration or other approved alternative technologies. In 1985, the Congress, in section 1521, title 50, United States Code, “Destruction of Existing Stockpile of Lethal Chemical Agents and Munitions,” (Public Law 99-145), directed DoD to oversee the destruction of the stockpile of lethal chemical agents and munitions because of concerns for the stockpile deterioration. The Army established the Program Manager for Chemical Demilitarization to manage the day-to-day operations of destroying the chemical weapons. In May 2001, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics designated the Demilitarization Program as a major Defense acquisition program (Acquisition Category ID) and assigned the Army as the Executive Agent. Through July 2002, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers awarded contracts for construction, systemization, operations, and closure of chemical destruction facilities at Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System, Johnston Island, Hawaii, and Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, Tooele, Utah. The Office of the Secretary of Defense approved a cost estimate totaling $24 billion, of which the program office awarded $5.8 billion in contracts for the Demilitarization Program.

Who Should Read This Report and Why? This report should be read by all who are interested in the Army’s demilitarization of its chemical munitions stockpile. This report discusses why the Army needs to update its acquisition program baseline agreement and to obtain a documented threat assessment.

Document Archive

 A Revised Acquisition Program Baseline and Threat Assessment for the Chemical Demilitarization Program, October 2002 [34 Pages, 1.4MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/dod/D-2003-015).pdf

The post A Revised Acquisition Program Baseline and Threat Assessment for the Chemical Demilitarization Program, October 2002 first appeared on The Black Vault.

Introduction as published in the document:

ISIL regularly uses social media and frequently receives coverage In news outlets. This guide enables the use of domestic and foreign websltes directly associated to the group. Most documents created or containing official ISIL Information will not likely be seen on the surface web.

Remember that research Is an iterative process and not accomplished In a single shot. Try different search terms, parameters, and language (English, French, and Arable}. When conducting OS INT research, do not login Into any social media platforms with either your personal account or a generic account. Also, do not contact any Individual you observe, like or follow any posts or groups that the individual is a part of nor the Individual himself. Stay passive and only observe. Do not visit any foreign website using an account attributed to any U.S. government or DoD IP address.

Document Archive

 ISIL Research Guide, September 2014 [9 Pages, 2.7MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/terrorism/ISILResearchGuide-usmc.pdf

The post ISIL Research Guide, September 2014 first appeared on The Black Vault.

From the report:

DOD’s ADM facility is to specialize in manufacturing biologics, with a focus on producing antibodies and vaccines. Until recently, the manufacture of biologic medical countermeasures has required a single facility to produce a single product (e.g., a vaccine), and extensive cleaning and sterilization of equipment was required to switch from manufacturing one product to another. However, recent technological advancements have made “flexible manufacturing” possible. These
technologies include the use of disposable equipment, such as equipment for growing cell cultures in disposable plastic material systems rather than in stainless steel tanks that require more time to clean and sterilize prior to the next use, and the use of modular sterile rooms to allow for the manufacture of multiple products simultaneously within a given facility. In the advanced research and development stage, potential medical countermeasures are further evaluated to demonstrate their safety and efficacy for preventing, diagnosing, or treating disease. Successful products are then available for final development and procurement.

As we reported in 2014, DOD is one of several agencies, along with HHS, involved in addressing and countering biological threat agents. As illustrated in figure 1, both DOD and HHS have specific biological medical countermeasure needs, some of which are shared.

Document Archive

 BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE – Additional Information That Congress May Find Useful as It Considers DOD’s Advanced Development and Manufacturing Capability, July 2017 [47 Pages, 2.9MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/gao/685889.pdf

The post BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE – Additional Information That Congress May Find Useful as It Considers DOD’s Advanced Development and Manufacturing Capability, July 2017 first appeared on The Black Vault.

On May 13, 2016, Popular Mechanics published an article entitled, “Congress Is Suddenly Interested in Cold Fusion.” David Hambling wrote:

“Cold fusion is rising again, thanks to allegedly successful experiments and demonstrations. Now interest in the field, also known as low energy nuclear reactions (LENR), has reached the highest levels, as the House Committee on Armed Services has asked the Secretary of Defense to provide “a briefing on the military utility of recent U.S. industrial base LENR advancements”  by September 22.

The Committee quotes a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) assessment that says if cold fusion works, it would be a disruptive technology that could revolutionize energy production and storage. That is putting it mildly. Commercial cold fusion as claimed by Andrea Rossi and others, outlined in our April article, would remove dependence on oil or other fossil fuels, domestic or imported.  In military terms, it would enable ships, aircraft, and tanks to continue indefinitely (or at least for months) without refueling, with abundant power for lasers or other directed-energy weapons.”

Intrigued, I filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for this briefing material cited in the article. I received the material, which included the PowerPoint presentation briefing material (converted to a .pdf) along with a few pages of emails concerning the LENR briefing.

The FOIA response letter below can also be referenced for additional information.

Document Archive

 FOIA Response [2 Pages, 0.6MB]

 Briefing on Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) Research (PowerPoint) 4 May 2016 [36 Pages, 1.8MB]

 E-Mails regarding the LENR Briefing [3 Pages, 0.6MB]

The post Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) Briefing Material, Department of Defense first appeared on The Black Vault.

According to the document:

In November 1990, we started the “Audit of the Management of the ISLAND SUN Program.” ISLAND SUN is an unclassified nickname for a special access program. The overall audit objective was to review program management, which included a review of financial controls. The Defense Information · Systems Agency (DISA), formerly Defense Communications Agency, administered the FY · 1985 through 1990 ISLAND SUN funds. The Comptroller, Joint Staff became responsible for administering the ISLAND SUN funds effective october 1, 1990. The National Security Agency (NSA), used the funds to provide program management and contracting support to the program. The Director for Operations, Joint Staff is the program sponsor and directs the use of the ISLAND SUN
funds.

In administering the FY 1990 Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) funds, DISA did not report the correct obligation status of the ISLAND SUN program. As a result, amounts that should have been available for obligation by the Joint Staff were not available. We found $8.1 million in invalid obligations and $7.6 million in unrecorded obligations. The unrecorded obligations may be used to offset the invalid obligations. We also found that DISA has recorded $.2 million more in commitments than can be supported. Poor record keeping ties up funds that could be made available for other uses.

We issued a draft quick-reaction report so that DISA could correct the ISLAND SUN program’s obligation status and make FY 1990 RDT&E funds, expiring September 30, 1991, available to the Joint Staff.

Document Archive

 Final Quick-Reaction Report on the Defense Information Systems Agency’s Financial Support to the ISLAND SUN Program, October 1991 [15 Pages, 1.3MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/dod/islandsun-dodig1.pdf

The post Final Quick-Reaction Report on the Defense Information Systems Agency’s Financial Support to the ISLAND SUN Program, October 1991 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.

According to the investigation report:

Our objective was to determine whether continental United States Army counterintelligence investigative activities and evidence handling procedures complied with Executive Order 12333, DoD policy, and U.S. Army regulations.

Findings

Overall, we found that the Army is conducting counterinteiHgence investigative activities and evidence handling procedures in accordance with Executive Order 12333, DoD policy, and U.S. Army regulations. However, we found that the Army does not have a policy for entering subjects of Limited Counterintelligence Assessments into the Defense Central Index of Investigations as outlined by DoD Instruction 5505.07, “Titling and Tndexing Subjects of Criminal Investigations in the Department of Defense,” January 27, 2012; Army Regulation 391-10, “U.S. Army Intelligence Activities, May 3, 2007; and Army Regulation 381-45, “Investigative Records Repository,” May 31, 2013. A Limited Counterintelligence Assessment is a local file initiated to determine if an incident or matter is
of counter intelligence interest.

The Investigation

 Evaluation of United States Army Counterintelligence Investigations and Evidence Handling Procedures, July 13, 2016 [38 Pages, 6.4MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/ig/2016-00797-DODIG.pdf

The post Evaluation of United States Army Counterintelligence Investigations and Evidence Handling Procedures, July 13, 2016 first appeared on The Black Vault.

NNSA receives its authority for the responsibility for all weapon and weapon-related functions from 50 USC 2402, Chapter 41.

DOE/NNSA and DoD cooperate in the development, production, and maintenance of nuclear weapons. Figure 1.1-1 illustrates DOE/NNSA/DoD organizational interrelationships. The basic document that establishes the interrelationships between the two agencies is “An Agreement Between the AEC and the DoD for the Development, Production, and Standardization of Atomic Weapons,” dated March 21, 1953. This is commonly referred to as the “1953 Agreement.” It was updated on September 5, 1984, by the “Supplement to the 1953 Agreement for the Development, Production, and Standardization of Atomic Weapons Between the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense.” The supplement delineates the functions of DOE/NNSA and DoD during joint feasibility studies for nuclear weapons (Phase 2), design definition and cost studies (Phase 2A), and development engineering (Phase 3). The 1953 Agreement was updated again in
1990 and supersedes the 1953 version.

Numerous Memoranda of Understanding (MOU), Memoranda of Agreement (MOA), and supplements provide additional guidance to agencies involved in the weapon development programs. Most of these are identified in a document titled “An Overview of DOE/DoD Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) and Memorandums of Agreement (MOA) Relating to Nuclear Weapons Development, Production, and Stockpile.”

In general, DOE/NNSA is responsible for designing, developing, producing, updating, and dismantling nuclear warheads, nuclear weapon trainers, and ancillary equipment, while DoD is responsible for designing, developing, and producing, and dismantling the weapon delivery system.

Declassified Manual

 National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Development and Production Manual (D & P) [665 Pages, 9.7MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/nnsa/17-00004-M.pdf

The post National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Development and Production Manual (D & P) first appeared on The Black Vault.

Over the past 24 months, the Office of Inspector General (OJG) has issued multiple reports assessing U.S. Government efforts to train, equip, and advise the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF).1 This is the fifth in a series of periodic reports that address ISAF development of the ANP/Mol and the Afghan National Army (ANA)/Ministry of Defense (MoD).

The metrics reports track ANSF progress toward assuming an independent and sustainable role in security operations. The OTG collects infmmation ft·om recurring briefings, reports, and other data collected and disseminated by ISAF and its subordinate commands-ISAF Joint Command (IJC), and NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan (NTM-A)/Combined Security Transition CommandAfghanistan (CSTC-A)- hereafter referred to as the Command. The OIG carefully reviews and references, but does not independently validate, the data.

The GIG-selected metrics used for this report provide indications of ANP development over the six-month reporting period from October 20 12 through March 20 13. The metrics track ANP/Mol development in three key areas: Sustainment, Professionalization, and ANP/Mol Transition to Afghan security lead.

Declassified Report

 Quarterly Assessment of Afghan National Security Forces Metrics, Ministry of Interior Police Forces, October 2012 – March 2013 [24 Pages, 4.2MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/ig/2013-00591.pdf

The post Quarterly Assessment of Afghan National Security Forces Metrics, Ministry of Interior Police Forces, October 2012 – March 2013 first appeared on The Black Vault.

This Instruction:

1.1 . Reissues reference (a) to implement policy, assign responsibilities, and prescribe guidance on the classification methodology for Information Operations (10) programs and capabilities within the Department of Defense.

1.2. Establishes guidance for proper protection of 10 activities.

1.3. Identifies and provides classification guidance on categories of IO activities. While this Instruction identifies the classification or classification ·range for specific items of classified information, it is not intended to be used as an itemized guide for applying Special Access Program (SAP) prota;tive measures. If required, SAP protective measures shall be in addition to the protections that are cited in this Instruction. 1.4. Addresses the relationship between the protection level for 10 activities and the security classification for specific elements of information within these activities. It clarifies information and requirements from a number of sources to identify the appropriate protection architecture for IO activities.

1.5. Constitutes authority and, in the absence of an approved program classification guide that provides specific classification instructions, shall be cited as the basis for derivative classification about, or declassification of, DoD information and material involved in 10.

DoD Instruction 0-3600.02

As of October 2016, this version is the latest.

 DoD Instruction 0-3600.02 “Information Operations (IO) Security Classification Guidance, November 28, 2005 [22 Pages, 4.9MB]

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/dod/14-F-1161.pdf

The post DoD Instruction 0-3600.02 “Information Operations (IO) Security Classification Guidance,” November 28, 2005 first appeared on The Black Vault.

The following 18 CD-ROMs were created by the DoD, when they transferred their FOIA Reading Room to their online Reading Room — when the collections were digitized. The Black Vault has archived the entire 18 CD set below.

Please note: Some of the CD’s did NOT have indexes. This includes CD #7, #12, #16, #16A, and #17.

CD-ROM #1 (6,788 Pages)

CD-ROM #2 (6,941 Pages)

CD-ROM #3 (7,551 Pages)

CD-ROM #4 (270 Pages)

CD-ROM #5 (7,148 Pages)

CD-ROM #6 (8,575 Pages)

CD-ROM #7 (2,546 Pages)

CD-ROM #8 (6,915 Pages)

CD-ROM #9 (8,688 Pages)

CD-ROM #10 (13,613 Pages)

CD-ROM #11 (16,311 Pages)

CD-ROM #12 (13,523 Pages)

CD-ROM #13 (4,842 Pages)

CD-ROM #14 (14,981 Pages)

CD-ROM #15 (6,177 Pages)

CD-ROM #16 (8,709 Pages)

CD-ROM #16A (4,358 Pages)

CD-ROM #17 (13,873 Pages)

The post DoD Document Collections first appeared on The Black Vault.