The controversy surrounding Luis Elizondo’s claims of directing the “Pentagon’s Secret UFO Program” known as the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) has sparked widespread debate. While Elizondo’s exact role in AATIP remains disputed by the Pentagon, it is confirmed that he was the director of the National Programs Special Management Staff (NPSMS) within the Department of Defense (DoD) at the time of his resignation.

In July 2021, The Black Vault made a discovery that Colonel Evelyn Laptook had replaced Luis Elizondo as the director of NPSMS. This document below revealed her name, as connected to being the director of the office that Elizondo resigned from less than a year prior:

The revelation prompted speculation by The Black Vault that if AATIP-related activities continued, they might still be managed within the NPSMS office where Elizondo was previously employed. Consequently, a FOIA request (21-F-1235) was filed by The Black Vault in July 2021 to uncover more information about this, as it possibly connected to Laptook or the office she ran at that time.

The FOIA request sought records containing keywords such as “AATIP,” “AAWSAP,” and “Advanced Aerospace” within Laptook’s email box. The search revealed one single exchange that connected to another FOIA request from 2018, referred to as CMO003127-18. This designator likely stems from the Correspondence and Task Management System (CATMS), a system designed for efficient management of tasks and correspondence within the DoD.

The likely FOIA request itself that this refers to is identified as 18-F-1477, which was filed by researcher Keith Basterfield, on August 8, 2018. Basterfield’s request sought, “… a copy of documents relating to the purpose; mission statement; vision; assessments; contracts; technical reports and outcomes of the Advanced Aerospace Threat (and) Identification Program. This program operated out of the National Programs area of the Sensitive Activities Directorate, under the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, for HUMINT, Counterintelligence and Security.” This wording matched that of the tasking email, indicating this was the request it referred to.

While processing the request for Basterfield, the FOIA office tasked it to a redacted individual, likely Col. Laptook, who was the NPSMS director at the time. Col. Laptook’s response indicated that the NPSMS’ mission “relates strictly to” a short redacted term, which is protected under FOIA exemption (b)(2). This exemption pertains to information solely related to the internal rules and practices of an agency. The secrecy surrounding the NPSMS’ mission continues to raise questions about the sensitivity and confidentiality of their operations. There remains not much known about the office, and when searched, the internet produces primarily results about Elizondo himself, but not much beyond it with the exception of court transcripts profiled by The Black Vault in 2019.

Additionally, a reference to a “sister office” was also redacted, suggesting that an extension of NPSMS is equally classified and shrouded in secrecy.

Despite the National Programs office within OUSDI stating they had no records related to AATIP, a subsequent email hinted at “background information” that could be relevant to the request. This suggests that although no direct records were found, there were still underlying details worth noting. One email stated, “I’ll try to touch base with you later today about background information that could be related to this request being tasked to your office.”

This exchange is significant as it highlights the complexity and secrecy surrounding AATIP and related programs. The correspondence shows that within the DoD, information about AATIP is closely held and continues to be a challenge to access. The fact that there was still “background information” to discuss, despite the official stance of no records given to Basterfield’s request in this instance, adds another layer to the mystery. More FOIA requests have been filed to seek out that information.

While these latest FOIA findings may not be earth-shattering, they contribute another piece to the complex puzzle of unraveling AATIP and its operations, whatever they may be, following its exposure by the New York Times and Politico.

Note: The original request filed by The Black Vault for information about what became ultimately known as AATIP to the public was filed on October 13, 2017. This was more than two months prior to the acronym AATIP (and full program name) being published by the mainstream media. This was FOIA case number 18-F-0077 and sought information about the program Elizondo described at the To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science press conference, which first introduced Elizondo to the public. That request yielded a “no records” response, after it went through several appeals.

The Black Vault remains committed to transparency and continues to seek answers through FOIA requests on this issue. Each new document and detail brings the general public closer to understanding the truth, whatever that may be.

For more in-depth and factually accurate articles grounded in verifiable evidence, stay tuned to The Black Vault.

UPDATE: On May 7, 2025, the Department of Defense responded to the remanded appeal (meaning, my appeal was granted) when fighting the original redactions on the records. In short, there was only one word, the name “Michael”, which was unredacted. The remaining exemptions stayed in place. That release is located below.

###

Document Archive

21-F-1322 Release [4 Pages, 1.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.13 MB]

21-FR-1322 Release (Appellate Release) [4 Pages, 1.5MB]

The post From AATIP to NPSMS: The Mystery Continues To Deepen first appeared on The Black Vault.

The document, issued in response to a FOIA request, catalogs hundreds of videotapes covering a wide range of topics related to lie detection, psychology, interrogation techniques, and legal considerations.

The archive includes both instructional content and topical case studies, many of which were used as part of DoDPI’s formal curriculum. Among the entries are:

• “The DeLorean Polygraph”

• “Satanic Rituals”

• “Child Sexual Abuse Course: Inmate Panel”

• “The Massey Triad”

• “Countermeasures in Polygraph”

• “Trial of Serial Killer Jeffrey Dahmer”

Other entries range from psychological theory to courtroom procedures and even news segments covering high-profile espionage cases and polygraph-related controversy.

The bibliography reflects the depth of material used in official government training during the late 20th century and provides a unique snapshot of how the polygraph was perceived and taught within the Department of Defense at the time.

Document Archive

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [7.25 MB]

The post DOD Polygraph Institute 1999 Audiovisual Training Archive first appeared on The Black Vault.

I’m going to — in a moment, I’ll turn it over to Dr. Kosloski to provide opening remarks, then we will go to Q&A. I will be moderating and calling on you. Because Dr. Kosloski is — this is his first time with you all, we would appreciate it if you would identify yourself by name and outlet when you ask your question. Please keep it to one question and one follow up. And as we — if we have more time, I will circle back. We have about 30 minutes. All right, Dr. Kosloski.

DR. JON KOSLOSKI: Thanks, Sue. Good morning. I’m Dr. Jon Kosloski, director of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office or AARO. It’s a pleasure to be here today to introduce myself and to provide an update of the work of our office. As you know, I assumed the AARO directorship in August following more than two decades at the National Security Agency where I did advanced research in the areas of optics, computing and crypto mathematics.

By nature, I’m drawn to tough scientific problems, which is what brought me to AARO and the UAP mission. Unidentified objects in any domain pose potential threats to safety and security. Reports of unidentified anomalous phenomenon, particularly near national security sites, must be treated seriously and investigated with scientific rigor by the U.S. government.

Since becoming director, I’ve been extremely pleased by AARO’s team and the framework they’ve established for rigorous analysis of UAP reports. AARO has taken meaningful steps to improve data collection and retention, bolster sensor development, effectively triage UAP reports, and reduce the stigma of reporting a UAP event.

In the coming year, AARO will prioritize building partnerships, promoting increased transparency and scaling up the work of the office.

This week, the department delivered its Fiscal Year 2024 consolidated annual report on UAP and had the opportunity to brief congressional staff on the report’s findings.

As of today, over 1,600 UAP reports, 757 of which — I’m sorry, AARO has received over 1,600 UAP reports, over 757 of which came to AARO during the period covered by the report. AARO has successfully resolved hundreds of cases in its holdings to commonplace objects such as balloons, birds, drones, satellites and aircraft.

Meanwhile, over 900 reports lack sufficient data for — scientific data for analysis and are retained in our active archive. These cases may be reopened and resolved, should additional information emerge to support analysis. I want to emphasize that although only a very small percentage of reports to AARO are potentially anomalous, these are the cases that require significant time, resources and a focused scientific inquiry by AARO and its partners.

It is also important to underscore that to date, AARO has discovered no verifiable evidence of extraterrestrial beings, activity or technology. None of the cases resolved by AARO have pointed to advanced capabilities or breakthrough technologies. It is also worth noting that AARO continues to see a geographic bias of UAP reports near U.S. military assets and sensors.

However, this bias has been mitigated somewhat by an increase in commercial pilot reporting in the continental United States. AARO is working closely with the services to implement existing reporting guidance while expanding UAP reporting to more of the interagency. Meanwhile, AARO continues to review the U.S. historical record relating to UAP and will release a second volume of its congressionally directed Historical Record Report.

We welcome any former or current government civilian, contractor or military service member with relevant information to reach out to us at www.AARO.mil. For every UAP report, operational or historical, AARO will follow the science and data wherever they lead. And we are committed to sharing as much information as possible at the unclassified level to inform the public of our activities and findings. With that, I’ll take your questions.

STAFF: Brandi?

Q: Thanks. Thank you so much for doing this. I’m Brandi Vincent with Defense Scoop. One question on the report and then a follow-up. It noted that the next step for Gremlin, the Gremlin capability, is conducting a 90-day pattern of life collection at a national security site. Where is that going to be? How did you pick that location? And what ultimately are you guys trying to accomplish with that?

DR. KOSLOSKI: So it’s currently deployed. We’d rather not say exactly where it is because we want it to be an unbiased test and don’t want to invite folks to come and do flyovers and test against the system. We chose that specific location because of the environment. We expect there to be a lot of variety in the types of things that we’re going to see. And there had been UAP reports in that general area.

And we’re trying to build a baseline. So, right now, we have this geographic bias where we are getting reports near the national security sites. But we also have a bias from pilots and other security personnel. So we want to have a better understanding of what normal looks like near those national security sites. And then eventually we’ll be expanding our baseline investigations to other areas in the U.S. to look at what normal looks like away from national security sites.

Q: And then, after the hearing on the Hill yesterday, lawmakers were saying that they are really keen to meet in a SCIF with AARO officials, other DOD officials, whistleblowers and members of Congress. Is that something you’ve been approached about, have done or are open to doing?

DR. KOSLOSKI: So we’re absolutely open to meeting with everybody. We’ve been meeting with a variety of folks, from whistleblowers through staffers. And we encourage anybody with direct information to come to us, go to our secure reporting mechanism on the website. And when we get that, we’ll reach out to them, schedule a meeting in the SCIF.

And Congress has enabled us to receive all sensitive information regardless of classification or NDAs they may have signed. And we receive that information. And we follow-up on every tip that they provide us.

Q: Thank you.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Yes.

STAFF: Oren

Q: Two questions. One, I was wondering if you could talk about whether any analysis or data of reports you have received has led you to the foreign adversary conclusion, specifically the UASs — 18 reports of UASs spotted near nuclear facilities? And then I was wondering if you could just talk about the — the — the effort to increase engagement with foreign partners for a better —a broader array of sensors, data analysis information.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Sure. So, firstly, no, we have not been able to correlate any UAP activity to adversarial collection activities or advanced technologies. I also want to make it clear that UAP covers a lot of potential activity by its very nature. The definition is in the name, right? So it’s unidentified and it’s anomalous. Once we know that it’s a UAV or a UAS of some nature, we then hand that responsibility off to one of our partners.

So Langley being a great example. It was known to be UAV activity, so we were there in a supporting role, but it was not our responsibility to address that. So those investigations are conducted by somebody else. And we’re focusing on the truly anomalous where we don’t understand the activity. And then for the foreign engagement, we’re working on increasing our foreign engagement.

We recognize that UAP is not just going to be a domestic issue. The office has focused primarily on U.S. government. And we’re going to be growing to public reporting soon in 2025. And we’re going to be growing our international partnerships hopefully also in 2025. So starting with the group that we have the most familiar — familiarity with and then growing that from there.

Q: Are there any specific countries you can name in terms of who you aim to work with?

DR. KOSLOSKI: We are going to be starting with the traditional allies of the DOD and the IC. And I’ll leave it at that for now until we have those partnerships well established and then we’ll probably come out with more information. Yes.

STAFF: Yes. Nick?

Q: Nick Schifrin, PBS NewsHour. Thanks very much for doing this. This may be basic and silly, but I just want to read you a quotation from the hearing yesterday and have you respond to it. This is Luis Elizondo, former DOD official. “Let me be clear. UAP are real. Advanced technologies not made by our government or any other government are monitoring sensitive military installations around the globe. The U.S. is in possession of UAP technologies as are some of our adversaries.”

Can you just give us a sense of your perspective on that quotation?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Break that down, so there’s a lot in that quotation. Firstly, absolutely agree. UAP are real. We — as I said, we’ve received 1,600 cases. A large number of those are unresolved, which means we don’t know exactly what they are. Until we know what they are or who they belong to, we can’t attribute intent and understand exactly what the purpose of that phenomenon is. So we’re not comfortable —we at AARO, are not comfortable saying at this time whether or not the UAP are there to collect information or not.

In regards to whether or not AARO, U.S. government or any other government has UAP. We have not found any evidence of that at this time.

Q: …but the bottom line conclusion remains what you said at the top — There is no verifiable evidence of extraterrestrial activity.

DR. KOSLOSKI: We have not found any, no. There are definitely anomalies. We have not been able to draw the link to extraterrestrial.

STAFF: Phil.

Q: Just to follow up on that.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Yes.

Q: You know, a lot of people read that or saw — just that hearing. You know, when you said there was no breakthrough technologies. I mean the person seems to be suggesting that, you know, at a minimum these are breakthrough technologies. What leads you to assume that the ones that —the UAP cases that you can’t resolve are not potentially breakthrough technologies? Or is it that you just haven’t been able to conclusively decide either way?

DR. KOSLOSKI: That’s exactly right. So we don’t fully understand the phenomenon enough to say whether or not it’s a breakthrough technology or not. So it’s a very small percentage of our overall cases that after the initial analysis still have the anomalous characteristics that one could attribute breakthrough technologies to. It’s less than 3.5% of our cases. And we’re still studying those with our IC and S&T partners, trying to understand what technologies could be used to provide those characteristics.

But we don’t understand them well enough to say whether it’s a breakthrough technology, a misunderstanding of the sensor performance or something else.

Q: And a skeptic might say that, you know, if you — just because you can’t explain it isn’t a reason to assume that it’s not a breakthrough technology or I mean by the definition of breakthrough technology would be something that you don’t have — if you don’t have it, you can’t explain, right?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Agree 100%. So, we’re not ruling it out. We’re open to that as an explanation for it. But we’re just not attributing breakthrough technology as the explanation to it. We’re — an open mind works both ways. So if we don’t understand what it is, we can’t say that it is or is not a breakthrough technology. So we’re just trying to keep an open mind.

Q: Got it. It’s not a catch 22.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Right.

Q: (inaudible) OK.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Yes. It — we accept that the explanation could be a misunderstanding of ours in interpreting the data or it could be a breakthrough technology. Until we understand, we don’t know.

Q: Thank you. Brad Dress, for The Hill. Have you found anything that might be a breakthrough technology? I know you’re saying you don’t know if there are breakthroughs yet, but something that might be a breakthrough technology near the military sites, some of those sightings you’ve seen near the military sites, have you found anything that might be that? Or are they all just been drones and UAS?

DR. KOSLOSKI: It’s definitely not all just drones and UAS. So we have several particularly interesting cases. We’re working on within the office, working with our partners to downgrade several of those cases, so we can talk about them publicly. But there are interesting cases that I, with my physics and engineering background and time in the IC, I do not understand. And I don’t know anybody else who understands them either.

Q: But those near military sites and facilities?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Until we get the information approved for release, I’d rather not say where those sightings were, but definitely interesting sightings.

Q: OK. Thank you. Tanya Nori with NewsNation. Can you please speak to AARO’s involvement in investigating incidents of drone or UAP, UAV incursions at the U.S. southern border with Mexico?

DR. KOSLOSKI: So we — I’m not that familiar with any specific investigations that we have — that AARO has supported for UAP or sorry, UAS, UAV activity near the southern border. We have had several UAP cases that have been brought to us that were near the border that we’ve investigated. I believe that we have resolved the cases that have been brought to us. And we’re working on downgrading those so that we can share those.

Q: And do you — can you speak to the procedures that are in place for Border Patrol agents to report UFO sightings? And how are those reports handled and investigated by the Pentagon overall and by AARO specifically?

DR. KOSLOSKI: So at this time, I don’t believe we have a formal mechanism for Border Patrol to report to AARO. Right now, the only formal mechanism is through the DOD. And we’re working on expanding that across the government through the interagency and for public reporting. We expect that formally to be in place hopefully in 2025. Right now, we’re getting those cases more through partnerships that those folks have with DOD or counterintelligence members.

STAFF: Luis?

Q: Hi. Luis Martinez with ABC News. Thank you for doing this and welcome.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Thank you for coming.

Q: Yes. I would like to follow-up on that earlier question about incidents you cannot explain based on your, you know, broad experience. A couple of follow-ups on that, please. Were these all within the last year? Were these all at the same location? Were you looking at video evidence? Or what are the metrics that you’re looking at that you cannot explain?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Great question. So of the cases that I’m thinking of, there’s a variety of them. The cases that are top of my mind are spread out over the last year and a half. I’m sure that there’s some other anomalous ones a little further back. But the ones that I’m particularly most interested in are the last year and a half. There is some video footage for a few of the cases, not all of the cases.

So it’s not just eyewitnesses. But in each of the cases I’m particularly interested in, there were multiple eyewitnesses. And there is additional data to go with them. It remains to be seen whether or not that additional data is going to be sufficient for us to either resolve the case, understand whether it’s a UAV, bird or balloon, or say something substantive about the nature of the unknown phenomenon.

So we’re still trying to understand whether or not there’s more data available. Because we get the data that comes in from the witnesses. But we also go through a bunch of other sources. Whether or not we can enrich the data that was brought to us and then build a better case. Still digging into it.

Q: What are some of the characteristics or are there — is there a trend among these things? And are they extended period incidents or are they very, very quick?

DR. KOSLOSKI: In each of these cases, they were not extended. The cases that I’m thinking of, there was no commonality across the different cases, different morphologies, so orbs, cylinders, triangles. In one of the cases, it has been happening over an extended period of time. And it is possible that there’s multiple things happening. There could be some UAV activity in the environment that’s getting confused or conflated with the UAP activity, so we’re trying to tease that out right now.

Q: Just to clarify, earlier, you said Langley was UAVs. This — who — the Langley incidents would not be among what you’re describing?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Correct.

Q: OK.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Correct.

STAFF: Konstantin?

Q: Thanks. Konstantin Toropin with Military.com. So one of the sort of key criticisms, I think, around this issue from the hearing yesterday was government transparency, lack of government transparency. I mean, can you sort of speak to that critique and whether you feel that AARO is being overly secretive? If you guys are working on being more transparent, sort of address this criticism from the Hill that you guys are emblematic of a government that overtly classifies everything and?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Yes, yes, it’s an understandable concern. And I’m going to make a comment. My wife would like me to share more about the UAP incidents too, but I’ll — I guess it’s on the record now, so.

(Laughter)

The fundamental issue is that AARO receives cases from our partners. And in most cases, to date, because we’ve been working through the services, those partners are providing data that is gathered from sensitive platforms. And we need to make sure that we are protecting sensitive sources and methods not introducing vulnerabilities to their operations.

So even though that there’s nothing inherently classified about the existence of a UAP, we have to protect that information. When AARO receives those interesting cases, the cases that we’re just briefly talking about, we try to identify if the UAP information can be isolated from the sensitive — usually it’s metadata that identifies characteristics of the platform.

And we work to downgrade that material as much as we can. But we can’t do it unilaterally. It has to be in partnership with the folks that brought that information. That is a very deliberate process, as you can imagine, to make sure that we’re not releasing sensitive information. So we have taken significant steps to speed that up. We’ve hired a number of declassification experts.

We’re going to be hosting a declassification workshop, so we can make sure we’re implementing best practices from across the DOD and the IC. All of that takes more time than I think the public would like for it to take, but AARO is working on it. We recognize that the types of cases that I was just talking about are, from my perspective, true anomalies.

And we’re going to need significant scientific rigor to address those. And yes, the U.S. government has a lot of nice scientists, little bias there, but we’re going to need the help of academia and the public to address some of these so we need to build that more transparent partnership.

Q: And just to follow-up sort of on the flip side, you know, is there any — as you look at cases to release for example, you talked about how at least one of the interesting ones is sort of ongoing. Is there a world where you hold back release out of fear of drawing more reports, you know, sort of drawing attention to a location and getting copycats or you know what have you sort of muddying the data?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Yes, so that concern has been raised to us. Because bad data in gets bad analysis out. However, no data in gets no analysis out. And so, being an NSA guy, I’m a firm believer in big data is going to lead to better conclusions. And I would rather have to filter out some of those copycat cases but have more substantive data. If we’re looking for a needle in a haystack, I’d rather have multiple haystacks to go digging through rather than just one.

Q: Thank you.

STAFF: Brandi.

Q: Just one quick follow up.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Yes.

Q: I’m sorry if I’ve missed it before, but what is AARO or your definition for breakthrough technology?

DR. KOSLOSKI: So lots of people, lots of organizations have different definitions. And the definition, the working definition that we’ve been using informally inside of our office, and we are working on more formal definitions for the different domains for space, the air domain and the undersea domain. But the general definition is beyond state of the art today and beyond where we think that we could get in the next couple years.

So we keep an eye on the capabilities of ourselves, our partners and everyone else at the academic and the very technical level. And then if it’s beyond that, then we would say that’s a breakthrough technology.

STAFF: Phil.

Q: Just a quick follow-up on your answer to Konstantin.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Yes.

Q: So, if you need to — I mean, I guess a lot of Americans have this view of the government as kind of all-knowing and being able to ascertain, you know, everything, particularly when they think of NSA and other agencies.

DR. KOSLOSKI: If only.

Q: And so, I guess if you could help us explain to readers, you know, what is it about these phenomena that — that, you know, reach the limits of government of the understanding of the professionals in the government and why it would be necessary to bring in academics? That’d be helpful for us.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Great question. So following on Brandi’s question, if it’s a breakthrough technology by its very nature, we don’t know how it would be done, right? If we knew how to do it, we’d be doing it already and it wouldn’t be a breakthrough technology. And so, usually those breakthroughs are coming from the academics. Historically, either in science or engineering, the breakthroughs come from academia and then they go into industry and then they come into government.

The government’s employing a lot of scientists like myself and others who understand a fair amount about the science. But being able to extend that to something that we could not have imagined when we were in school or when we were in training is a very difficult process. And so we’re going to have to pull in those folks that they spend all day every day just thinking of what is the next possible thing that you could do if you were just to tweak the equations a little bit this way or change the material a little bit that way.

And the government, because of our day jobs we don’t get to spend all day every day doing that as much as I would like to.

STAFF: Nick?

Q: Just two small clarification, so the — what you called interesting cases at the beginning and then Luis asked you more specific spread out over the last year and a half. Just to be clear, those are cases that we don’t know about, right? Meaning, we have not read about these cases that you’re speaking about?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Correct, correct.

Q: You said to Luis, one of the cases has been happening over extended period of time. I think Konstantin said ongoing. Just to be clear, that is ongoing or you just —or was it just happening over extended period of time? And you’re not saying whether it’s extended or not?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Extended period of time. It may be ongoing. But we don’t know if the current activity is just drone activity in the environment. And so, we’re trying to follow-up on that. We had put more energy into it earlier on, something flared up and now we’re checking on it.

Q: OK.

Q: Ellie, CBS. Just a follow-up on the interesting cases. Are the interesting cases that you’re talking about the 21 cases that merit further analysis or are they part of the active archive?

DR. KOSLOSKI: They’re part of the 21, yes, that merit. So the active archive, just so that we’re clear, those are cases where we don’t have enough scientific data to continue the analysis. We’re always looking for more. And then when we do, we’ll pull those into the merit more analysis. Yes.

STAFF: Luis

Q: Last year’s report in the time frame had 281 new, I believe incidents. Now you have 485. What do we owe this really large increase to?

DR. KOSLOSKI: So I just —the new incidents I think to be clear, this — it had 757.

Q: In your report here, you talk about a total of 757, you know, in the period of the reporting period.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Yes.

Q: Of which 485 were from this year and then the remainder were from previous.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Oh, yes. Yes.

Q: But then, in last year’s report, which was from — and I’m looking at my notes here —

DR. KOSLOSKI: Why the ramp up in reporting?

Q: Yes, I mean an additional 200, I mean in the same reporting period?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Yes. Engagement.

Q: Right.

DR. KOSLOSKI: So we’re — we have the GENADMIN out. We’re engaged with the services. We’re engaging more with the services, helping them understand what qualifies as a UAP, how to report it. And we’re getting more reports of the anomalous activity. It’s not that there’s —we don’t believe that there’s necessarily more anomalous activity.

It’s just, we’re getting greater, greater reporting. And we expect as we continue that engagement with the services, but also across the IC and the rest of the government to the question earlier, we’re going to see that reporting go up as well. We’re going to follow that with education campaigns, so that for example, the FAA is providing us reports now as well.

So we’re getting reports from the pilots. Some of the reports from the pilots are Starlink flares, so light glinting off of satellites at just the right time of the evening. It looks interesting and potentially anomalous. But we can model that and we can show pilots what that anomaly looks like, so that that doesn’t get reported to us necessarily.

So we’re going to follow up the engagement campaigns with education campaigns so that as we’re increasing the number of accounts that come to us, we’re not just getting more of the noise and trying to keep it focused on the interesting.

STAFF: Oren.

Q: Just a very quick question on the active archive, do you have an instance or instances where you have gotten more information for an event in the active archive and have pulled it out or is that?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Thank you for asking. We do, yes.

(Laughter)

Yes, we do. So it actually was the instance that I’m most familiar with was a Starlink instance. So we had several folks over the period, I think, it was multiple months, where we’re seeing interesting activity in the sky. And we found that when we — because we’re continuously looking back at that active archive and looking for correlations across those incidents, but also new incidents coming in.

We found some of those correlations in time, the direction that they were looking, and the location. And we were able to assess that they were all in those cases looking at Starlink flares. Yes.

STAFF: (inaudible)

Q: How many people work in your office?

DR. KOSLOSKI: We have several dozen folks working in the office, but the power of the office isn’t the number of people who work in it, it’s our partnerships across the IC and the DOD. And hopefully, in the near future academia as well.

STAFF: Luis.

Q: In the historical report from earlier this year, there was mentioned that in the 1950s and 60s as pilots started, commercial pilots started flying, they saw reflections as well off of what were like U-2 aircraft at that time. So this new Starlink seems to be very reminiscent of that. That’s—

DR. KOSLOSKI: Yes, very reminiscent. Yes.

Q: So you’re seeing an uptick in that, that might be again, a historical parallel, right?

DR. KOSLOSKI: Yes. And we do see some trends in the morphologies that are reported. So for a while, we were seeing a lot more balloons. And then pilots started understanding what some of the space trash looked like. And now we’re seeing as the mega satellite constellations are increasing, Starlink and there’s others that are going up, we’re seeing an increase in those lights in the sky that look very unusual as those satellites are deploying. And we expect that that trend will also go down eventually. Yes.

STAFF: Ellie?

Q: I have to ask a broadcast specific question, but do you anticipate releasing any video related to any of the cases that were ruled out or that are still unexplained?

DR. KOSLOSKI: So we’re going to be — we have some resolved cases that are of public interest that have been talked about publicly that will be releasing on the 19th. I think those are going to come with videos? Yes. And then, as we downgrade information, the hope is that we will be able to release as much of that content as we can to the public so that we can get help in resolving them. Yes.

STAFF: Mosheh?

Q: Thanks for doing this. Mosheh Gaines with NBC. You said earlier that there wasn’t evidence that the UAP activity was linked to foreign adversaries. But I’m wondering, have you seen any kind of suggestion that foreign adversaries have been trying to capitalize off of this with disinformation or anything else?

DR. KOSLOSKI: We have not. But I am concerned that somebody could use the potential stigma to and take advantage of that. If there is a stigma associated with reporting UAP, then that’s an opportunity for the adversary to maybe conduct collection operations and not have folks report on it. But we haven’t seen evidence of that yet.

STAFF: We’ve got time for one more question. Anybody have one? (inaudible)

Q: So can you speak to any historic incidents like the Phoenix Lights incident in the 1990s, which many who claimed to have been a witness to the event feel the government has never taken seriously?

DR. KOSLOSKI: So, we take those incidents very seriously. And we’re going to be releasing some analysis in the upcoming Volume II Historical Report in the next few months, where we were able to resolve a number of historic cases. There are quite a few cases of public interest where we have resource limitations, either we can’t get enough technical data from — back.

In the case of the Phoenix, there’s lots of video. And we can — we’re still working on that. I was actually having a conversation with somebody earlier this morning about additional data we can get for the Phoenix case. But in a lot of the historic cases, we’re going looking for film. And the film has been recycled or destroyed because it’s too expensive to retain.

And so we’re going to museums. And all of that takes a lot of manpower. At the same time, we’re trying to resolve these other interesting cases that are coming in continuously, these 1,600 cases that we have. So we’re trying to balance those. But the historical report that’s coming out will have some of those that you had asked about.

STAFF: All right, folks. Thank you very much.

DR. KOSLOSKI: Thank you very much.

Q: Thank you.

The post Transcript: Dr. Jon Kosloski, Director, AARO, Media Roundtable on the FY24 Consolidated Annual Report on UAP – November 14, 2024 first appeared on The Black Vault.

After years of bureaucratic obstacles and inconsistent responses, The Black Vault has obtained a highly sought after document through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that directly references the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), reported since 2017 as “The Pentagon’s Secret Search for UFOs“. The draft memo, never-before-seen by the public and authored by former DoD counterintelligence agent Luis Elizondo, details AATIP’s mission as “focusing on beyond next generation technologies in the areas of lift, propulsion, cloaking, and human effects,” and describes how AATIP was gathering information on “unexplained or unknown aerial systems” from various DoD components and elements. But more importantly to some, it may even confirm Elizondo’s official work within the program, a claim denied by the Pentagon since 2019.

The journey to obtain these records began on May 5, 2021, when The Black Vault filed FOIA case 21-F-0964. The request specifically sought communications between Elizondo and Neill Tipton, a senior DoD official that was also one of three named individuals in Elizondo’s DoD Inspector General (IG) complaint filed on May 3, 2021. This complaint alleged that all three (Tipton, Pentagon Spokesperson Susan Gough and former Director for Defense Intelligence [Intelligence and Security] Garry Reid) “conducted retribution and provided false information to the public,” and were also accused by Elizondo of “abusing government authority” and “illegal destruction of information.” This complaint stemmed from Elizondo’s belief that he was being mistreated after his resignation from the Pentagon due to his decision to speak about his time investigating UFOs, now being referred to as Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP).

After amending the FOIA request to focus only on emails between Elizondo and Tipton containing keywords such as “unidentified,” “AATIP,” and “UAP,” (and others) in response to the DoD’s request to narrow the search scope, the DoD initially replied in December 2021, stating that “no records” were found.

Believing differently, The Black Vault filed an appeal within one day, asserting that responsive documents existed. This assertion was based on knowledge gained from various sources and research means during the timeframe leading up to the case filing. The information learned through this process, combined with the specific keywords provided for the FOIA request along with the date range requested for the search (2008 – 2017), left little to no doubt that responsive records existed.

“September 25, 2017, at 11:23a, Mr. Luis Elizondo sent an e-mail to Mr. Neill Tipton which included the ‘AATIP’ acronym in the body,” the appeal stated. This fact alone should have yielded at least one responsive document to the request, which was used as the basis of the appeal.

The appeal letter filed by The Black Vault went on to further express deep frustration with the FOIA process, the DoD, and their handling of cases related to AATIP and Elizondo, stating:

“Let me add within the body of this appeal, on how frustrating some of these requests are getting. I believe, and hope, your office has seen the lengths I’ve gone to try and make your efforts easier by closing / withdrawing requests, to reduce paperwork etc. I am also always there, when possible, to amend requests to also lessen the burden of a workload. However, as you can see with this case alone (and now many others), cases are having me reduce the scope to help, but after months (and sometimes years) of waiting, they are inappropriately closed, and I have to then go through the lengthy appeal process. There are NUMEROUS agencies that I can cite, where requests are processed for communications between two people, without stipulating a keyword search. I am sure a keyword reduction in scope helps, but as we can see here, that is likely creating more problems; generating more paperwork; and wasting more time than it is actually helping.”

The appeal was also cc’d electronically to the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS), which acts as a mediator between FOIA requesters and federal agencies, helping to resolve disputes and ensure proper handling of FOIA requests.

The appeal was ultimately granted in February 2022, and the case was remanded back to the DoD for further processing. Despite this, The Black Vault never received an acknowledgment that the case had been reopened, as required by law. When The Black Vault inquired about the status in August 2023, a year and a half after the case should have been reopened and acknowledged, the DoD responded that an acknowledgment letter had not been sent as it was “overlooked.” Although it was then sent that day, and the case was renumbered as 21-FR-0964 due to the remand, there was no estimated date of completion given.

In a puzzling sequence of events that followed, the documents related to FOIA case 21-FR-0964 were later  allegedly released on March 29, 2024. But yet again, The Black Vault never received that correspondence, either, and no explanation was given as to why that was by the writing of this article. The results of that case, once the documents were finally received just this week, in a moment.

But first, it turned out that the same documents requested in 21-FR-0964 happened to turn up and were released in May 2024 under FOIA case 21-F-1154, but they had extensive redactions. This case was originally filed by The Black Vault in June 2021.

These redactions included the complete blacking out of a crucial memo on AATIP which was attached to one of the emails written by Elizondo that was released in that case. In addition, another reference to AATIP in one of the emails was also mysteriously redacted, even though it had already been published unofficially and was available in the public domain through Elizondo’s IG complaint about 2 years prior and a portion of the same referenced in Popular Mechanics another 2 years prior to that.

These actions further complicated the DoD’s already questionable handling of these types of requests. The DoD had claimed FOIA’s “deliberative process” exemption known as (b)(5) to justify the redactions of AATIP related material, despite some of it already being available in the public domain for years. From a legal standpoint, The Black Vault felt none of these actions were justified, and an appeal was filed. As of the writing of this article, that appeal remains open. This was all reported by The Black Vault on May 13, 2024.

Now back to FOIA case 21-FR-0964.

This week, sparked by the release of Elizondo’s new book Imminent which contains numerous references to Tipton, a follow up was sent by The Black Vault regarding FOIA case 21-FR-0964 to check on the status. Although no explanation was given, the same day the follow up was sent, the FOIA case officer emailed the final FOIA response letter that was dated March 29, 2024, nearly 5 months ago; an email thread between Elizondo and Tipton about “responsibilities for AATIP” being transferred between the two gentlemen which mysteriously had redactions lifted contrary to FOIA case 21-F-1154; and the AATIP memo that The Black Vault was fighting for through appeal on FOIA case 21-F-1154, which now appeared nearly entirely unredacted.

The documents, which were first denied by the DoD to even exist three years ago, were now found. As of the writing of this article, no explanation as to either why the DoD never found them, or why they were not truthful in their 2021 response to The Black Vault, has been given.

This AATIP memo, never-before-seen by the public until now, was originally drafted in 2017 by Elizondo in hopes that it would be later issued by then Deputy Secretary of Defense (DepSecDef) Patrick M. Shanahan. It confirms the existence of AATIP and the scope of the program. The memo states that AATIP was a program with a strategic focus on “beyond next generation technologies in the areas of lift, propulsion, cloaking, and human effects,” and sought “unexplained or unknown aerial systems” information from all DoD elements “for the purposes of intelligence analysis and exploitation.”

The memo states that the “DoD continues to consider AATIP a priority, especially given recent advancements with Unmanned Aerial Surveillance (UAS) platforms that are becoming widely available.”

Further to that, it states that OUSDI “has a demonstrated interest for any and all reporting involving anomalous UAS threats” and it goes on to order that “all DoD elements are hereby required to provide a courtesy copy of any data and information obtained from the field that related to unexplained or unknown aerial systems to the Director of Defense Intelligence for Technical Collection and Special Programs.” That position was held by Neill Tipton, and this memorandum, if officially issued by the DepSecDef department-wide, would ultimately make Tipton’s desk the central point of information related to AATIP once information was received from DoD elements.

Although it does not reference “UAP” or “UFOs” specifically, the mention of “unexplained or unknown aerial systems” and “anomalous UAS threats” makes it the first official DoD document of its kind to connect “AATIP” to such a mission investigating “unexplained” objects.

In addition to giving a rundown of AATIP’s scope and mission, the existence of this memo may also directly contradict the DoD’s ongoing assertions that Elizondo had no official role in the program. This has been a claim by the Pentagon that has fueled much controversy that has lasted for years. Could the revelations within the memo have played a role in why the DoD wanted to deny the memo’s existence three years ago? Or, was this truly an administrative oversight, and the documents were simply “overlooked” similar to how the DoD failed to send an acknowledgement letter once the case was remanded back to them that sought it in the first place?

Regardless of why this memo was not discovered and denied to exist in 2021, it likely won’t settle the debate about Elizondo’s claimed leadership of AATIP or the stated objectives of AATIP once and for all.

For some, this memo will absolutely be viewed as a pivotal piece of evidence in the ongoing debate over AATIP’s scope and Elizondo’s involvement. To them, this will serve as undeniable proof, if they even felt undeniable proof wasn’t already out there to begin with.

To others, the release of this may simply be seen as a draft memorandum that was authored by Elizondo, without definitively proving his leadership or directorship of a “funded” “UFO program” known as “AATIP,” and in the end, to them, it will prove nothing.

This juxtaposition is a true testament to the divide between skeptics and believers in today’s conversation about the UFO topic.

But even as early as just days ago, the DoD still continues to deny Elizondo’s official involvement in AATIP — a claim Elizondo still strongly disputes. However, that was prior to the DoD releasing and the public seeing this memorandum. So, The Black Vault reached out to the Pentagon for comment.

“How does this not contradict the DoD’s stance on Luis Elizondo, and the denial of his official responsibilities on AATIP? Why would he be drafting such a memorandum if AATIP had long been cancelled (per DoD), and that he had no official responsibilities on it (per DoD)?”, the first question asked.

After publication of this article, Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough submitted comment by stating, “Luis Elizondo had no assigned responsibilities for AATIP.  As noted in the Historical Record Report Volume 1, available on www.aaro.mil, AATIP was never an official, recognized DoD program. The draft, unsigned ‘memo for the record’ that you reference was crafted by Mr. Elizondo and appears to have been unsolicited.”

Given the opportunity to respond to the above, Elizondo added, “The memo they claim was ‘unsolicited’ was in fact a request by none other than the Secretary’s front office staff. Not only is the DoD spokesperson wrong, but any due diligence on their part would have illustrated this. This is yet another sad attempt to once again deceive the American people by a select few in the Pentagon’s PAO. Unfortunately, this type of behavior conducted by a few bad faith individuals, only further damages the credibility of an organization who has very little credibility left to offer. The sad truth is that this type of behavior reflects poorly on the entire Pentagon, including the majority who are patriotic, loyal, and selfless. Fortunately, the truth always comes out as it always has.”

This was followed up by, “Why would the DoD tell me [this memo]  didn’t exist, but I later would be successful getting it after an appeal from the same office that denied it existed in the first place?”

After publication of this article, Pentagon spokesperson Susan Gough submitted comment by stating, “As indicated in the response letter to you dated December 14, 2021, regarding 21-F-0964, the initial FOIA search did not yield responsive records.”

Given the opportunity to respond to the above, Elizondo added, “This response isn’t even worthy or a response. It’s clear that obfuscation and deceit is the new norm for the same few at the PAO office. I would once again remind them that propaganda and disinformation against the American public is illegal.”

Elizondo also provided the following written statement to the Black Vault about this release, which underscores his thoughts about the importance of it all:

“Thanks to The Black Vault’s continued pursuit of the facts, the DoD had no choice but to relent and admit the obvious. 1) AATIP was a real program and funded. 2) My former employer, the OUSD(I) has had, and currently has a keen interest in AATIP and the UAP topic. 3) There remains a clear national security nexus as it relates to UAP. My fear is that unless more people demand the truth, this information which many of us already knew, would never see the light of day and remain hidden from the public. An excellent example of The Black Vault not taking ‘no’ for an answer.” 

As the controversy surrounding AATIP will undoubtedly continue, The Black Vault remains committed to bringing the truth to light, whatever that may be, despite the challenges posed by the DoD’s problematic FOIA process.

###

Document Archive

21-FR-0964 FOIA Case File Release [4 Pages, 1.43MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.43 MB]

The post AATIP Memo Unveiled After FOIA Battle: DoD Inconsistencies Exposed first appeared on The Black Vault.

The directive was signed and implemented by William H. Taft IV, who served as the Deputy Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan. Taft, a prominent figure in defense and legal circles, was known for his role in shaping U.S. military policy during the Cold War era. His tenure included significant contributions to the strategic doctrines that governed the use of weapons of mass destruction.

According to the document release, which took more than four years to get completed, the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) initially had no objections to releasing the directive in full. However, the Joint Chiefs of Staff intervened, resulting in specific portions being redacted. The redactions were made under Executive Order 13526, 3.3(b)(5), which protects information that could potentially reveal active U.S. military war plans or operational elements of past plans that remain relevant.

The release of this document provides insight into U.S. chemical weapons policy during a critical period in the late 20th century. The directive explicitly details the U.S. strategy to deter the use of chemical, toxin, and biological weapons by maintaining military capabilities to retaliate effectively. It states, “The U.S. reservation to the Geneva Protocol of 1925… allows for retaliation with chemical weapons against a violator if chemical, toxin, or biological weapons are used against U.S. allies even if U.S. forces are not directly attacked.”

The directive also outlines the procedures for the deployment and employment of chemical weapons, emphasizing the importance of maintaining readiness and survivability of chemical-capable forces. For instance, it asserts that “Chemical weapons shall be employed only against suitable tactical targets of military value,” and underscores that the use of such weapons in response to enemy chemical attacks requires the approval of the President of the United States.

The redacted portions also would have seemed to have added more important context when it comes to the use of chemical weapons. For example:

In this particular portion above, you can see that the redacted portions outline the intended damage caused by a retaliatory chemical weapon strike. The paragraph later talks about the want to inflict “at least” but the next portion is redacted.

Another section talks about the “maximum effectiveness” of chemical capabilities, but the opening remarks are fully redacted.

The MDR process, which led to the release of this document, allows for the declassification of government records in response to a specific request. The Black Vault utilized this process to obtain the directive, shedding light on a piece of Cold War history that had remained hidden for decades.

The document is available below for download.

###

Document Archive

 Release of the 1987 DoD Directive S-3145.2: Chemical Weapons Policy [10 Pages, 2MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [2.03 MB]

The post Release of the 1987 DoD Directive S-3145.2: Chemical Weapons Policy first appeared on The Black Vault.

One of the primary focuses of the emails was the draft report titled “Evaluation of the Screening of Displaced Persons From Afghanistan.” This report, identified by Project No. D2021-DEV0PD-0161.000, examined the screening processes for Afghans arriving in the U.S. after the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan in 2021. Internal emails reveal extensive coordination between various DoD offices to review and comment on the draft.

On January 7, 2022, an email from a DoD OIG auditor reminded recipients to submit their comments on the draft by the end of the day. The draft report titled “DoD Efforts to Address Ideological Extremism in the Armed Forces” was also circulated, requesting factual accuracy reviews and security marking checks.

Subsequent emails, exchanged from January 20 to January 24, 2022, highlight discussions between the DoD OIG and Garry Reid’s office to schedule conference calls addressing feedback on the draft reports. Notably, the emails discussed a policy change requiring Afghan arrivals to complete mandatory medical processing at government facilities before leaving Safe Havens. This policy shift occurred after initial guidance allowed for self-administered vaccines, which led to concerns about individuals “walking off” the bases.

The draft report on ideological extremism within the armed forces, identified by Project No. D2021-DEV0PB-0079.000, was another focal point. This report aimed to evaluate the DoD’s efforts to combat extremism within its ranks and provided recommendations for policy and procedural changes. Recipients were asked to ensure the draft’s factual accuracy and review its security markings.

The 31 pages withheld from the release consisted of a discussion draft of the report “DODIG-2022-095, Evaluation of Department of Defense Efforts to Address Ideological Extremism Within the Armed Forces.” The final report, included in the release, offered a comprehensive evaluation of the DoD’s measures to address extremism and detailed policy recommendations.

These documents shed light on the DoD’s internal review processes and the steps taken to improve both the screening of displaced persons from Afghanistan and efforts to counter ideological extremism within the military.

###

Document Archive

DODOIG-2024-000309 Document Release [134 Pages, 7.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [7.47 MB]

The post DoD’s Private Discussions on 2022 Afghan Screening and Extremism IG Reports first appeared on The Black Vault.

• The Department of Defense released another ‘Briefing Card’ about the AOIMSG, a DoD effort previously studying UFOs.
• This document contains intriguing redactions under exemption (b)(5) and extra information that were absent in previous releases of the same record.
• A question in the ‘Questions and Answers’ section and an entire section under ‘Additional Background Information (Not for release)’ have been redacted, prompting questions about the content and why it’s being withheld in public affairs materials.
• The placement of the “Additional Background Information” section under a question about “extraterrestrials” prompts the questions on whether or not they are related.

The Department of Defense (DoD) has just released another “Briefing Card” pertaining to the establishment of the Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group (AOIMSG). The AOIMSG was a DoD entity dedicated to detecting and identifying unidentified objects of interest in special-use airspace.  These newly released records were released as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) release in case 22-F-0381.

The briefing card, possibly a “draft” version, dated December 9, 2021, carries certain intriguing redactions and extra information that were absent in previous documents released by the DoD, which were chronicled on The Black Vault just weeks ago.

Intriguingly, an entire question in the ‘Questions and Answers’ section is blotted out under exemption (b)(5). This exemption is applied to “inter- and intra- agency memoranda which are deliberative in nature,” according to the denial letter from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD).

When compared to the previous release by The Black Vault, it appears the redaction was absent, however, it’s unclear if the presumed “draft” version just released holds the same question revealed last time and the redaction was placed in error.

Here is a side-by-side comparison of both releases:

Similarly, an entire section under ‘Additional Background Information (Not for Release)’ is also blanketed with exemption (b)(5), prompting questions about the nature of the redacted content, and its placement within the document itself.

The redactions, and even the entire section about “Additional Background Information” was not included in the May 16, 2023, release to The Black Vault, nor was any information referenced in the denial letter as being entirely withheld.

It should also be noted that the “Additional Background Information” material follows one of the more intriguing sections of the public affairs “briefing card” document; the question about extraterrestrials.

“Has the Department found any evidence of extraterrestrial technology?”, the question reads. The answer set for the public states, “The examinations into incursions by UAPs are still ongoing; we lack sufficient information in our dataset to attribute incidents to specific explanations. It is not the purpose of the AOIMSG to look for evidence of extraterrestrials. Other parts of the government do that; for example, NASA looks for evidence of life on other planets.”

What follows is the information exempted from release under the “Additional Background Information” header, but it is unknown if that information relates to the question about extraterrestrials, or if it entirely unrelated.

The redactions raise eyebrows and quite rightfully so. These are Public Affairs records, and their purpose is to chronicle information meant for the public, not to document information to withhold from the public.

There’s a growing public interest in the potential implications of UAP/UFOs on national security and aviation safety. In the spirit of democratic transparency and the need to build public trust, full disclosure of such information is paramount.

Furthermore, the case for transparency is especially strong given the current climate surrounding UFOs/UAPs. With sightings continuing to be reported by military personnel and the establishment of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) which replaced the AOIMSG, it’s clear that this topic is not fading into the background.

In response to these questionable redactions, an appeal has been filed by The Black Vault.  During the course of that case, the DoD will  reassess the redactions, consider the immense public interest, and hopefully take a step toward greater transparency on this important subject.

As the saga continues to unfold, it’s crucial that we remember the public’s right to be informed, especially on a topic that has captured the world’s attention. As we seek answers to the questions surrounding UAP/UFOs, it’s clear that the fight for transparency is far from over.

UPDATE: On April 3, 2024, the appeal was finalized and the document was released, with the pertinent redactions lifted. That release is also available below.

###

Document Archive

FOIA Case 22-F-0381 Release

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.53 MB]

FOIA Appeal 22-A-0381-A

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [347.18 KB]

The post DoD Releases Another AOIMSG Briefing Card: Questions Raised Over Redactions (UPDATED) first appeared on The Black Vault.

The Department of Defense Office of Inspector General (DoD OIG), led by Inspector General Robert P. Storch, has released an unclassified summary of a previously classified report titled “Evaluation of the DoD’s Actions Regarding Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP).” This disclosure follows a full version of the classified report issued on August 15, 2023.

Inspector General Storch remarked, “Given the significant public interest in how the DoD is addressing UAPs, we are releasing this unclassified summary to be as transparent as possible with the American people about our oversight work on this important issue.”

The unclassified summary reveals that the DoD lacks a comprehensive and coordinated strategy for addressing UAPs. It is found that different components within the DoD have developed varied processes for the collection, analysis, and identification of UAP incidents. This lack of uniformity and integration poses potential risks to national security and military forces. The summary states, “the DoD’s lack of a comprehensive, coordinated approach to address UAP may pose a threat to military forces and national security.”

One significant concern highlighted in the summary is the absence of an overarching UAP policy within the DoD. This gap means that there is no assurance of identifying and mitigating potential national security and flight safety threats posed by UAPs. The DoD OIG emphasizes the need for a unified policy, as the current state lacks “assurance that national security and flight safety threats to the United States from UAP have been identified and mitigated.”

To address these shortcomings, the DoD OIG has proposed 11 total recommendations to various defense bodies, including the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, and the Director of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office. These recommendations focus on establishing a coherent policy integrating roles, responsibilities, and coordination procedures relating to UAP into the existing framework of intelligence, counterintelligence, and force protection policies.

The summary serves as a call to action for the DoD to formulate a consistent approach to UAP incidents, encompassing aspects of intelligence gathering, analysis, and policy formulation. The need for a unified response is critical in ensuring the security and safety of military operations and national interests in the face of unidentified aerial phenomena.

The unclassified summary of the report, now accessible to the public, is obviously a trimmed down version of the classified report issued last August. The Black Vault, since August 2023, has had an open case for the review and release of the report. Updates on that will be posted, when available.

Document Archive

Unclassified Summary of Report No. DODIG-2023-109, “Evaluation of the DoD’s Actions Regarding Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena,” August 15, 2023 [16 Pages, 2.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [2.57 MB]

The post IG’s Evaluation of the DoD’s Actions Regarding Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Finally Released first appeared on The Black Vault.

These newly released reports, which are accompanied only by visuals inside the PDF files, are available below:

Atmospheric Wake Case Resolution

These reports were submitted after three different missions in the Middle East, and the Mediterranean Sea in 2022 and 2023. The reports were filed due to the potential hazard posed to the mission and because the videos depict a potentially anomalous propulsion signature.

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.30 MB]

Southeast Asia Triangles Case Resolution

Six triangular objects in a formation were originally flagged as potentially anomalous and potentially posing a risk to navigation.

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.21 MB]

Western United States Case Resolution

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.03 MB]

The post AARO Releases Three “Case Resolution” Reports Identifying UAP/UFO Cases first appeared on The Black Vault.

On November 9, 2023, Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks issued the following statement about the departure of All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) Director Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick:

All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) Director Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick announced that he will retire from federal service in December.

During his distinguished 27-year career of public service in the Department of Defense and the United States Intelligence Community, and since assuming leadership of AARO, Dr. Kirkpatrick has served the American people with honesty and integrity, tackling an incredibly difficult mission to explain the unknown.

During his tenure, Dr. Kirkpatrick stood up the office and its operations, investigated more than 800 unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) cases, led an extensive search for U.S. Government and contractor programs associated with UAP, and established the department’s first public-facing website, www.aaro.mil, to bring greater transparency to the department’s work.

His commitment to transparency with the United States Congress and the American public on UAP leaves a legacy the department will carry forward as AARO continues its mission.

Our department is stronger and better prepared for future scientific and national security challenges because of Sean’s distinguished service to our country.

We are deeply appreciative of his tenacity, insight, and undying dedication to our national security mission, and wish him the greatest of success in his future endeavors.

The Department of Defense, in coordination with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, is in the process of searching for the next AARO Director, and it will publicly announce its selection once made.

The post Statement by Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks on the Upcoming Departure of All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) Director Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick first appeared on The Black Vault.

During the stated period, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) registered a total of 291 UAP reports. Out of these, 274 were from the aforementioned period, while 17 were from earlier reporting periods that had not been previously submitted. The report outlined:

“Most reports still reflect a bias towards restricted military airspace, a result of reporting from military personnel and sensors present in such areas. This bias has been lessened by reporting from commercial pilots showing a more diverse geographic distribution of UAP sightings across the United States.”

While the AARO has not received any evidence linking UAP sightings to health concerns, several reports do highlight potential safety concerns for military aviation. Specifically, some UAPs reportedly displayed concerning performance characteristics, including high-speed travel and unusual maneuverability. Nevertheless, the report assures:

“While the mere presence of UAP in the airspace represents a potential hazard to flight safety, none of these reports suggest the UAP maneuvered to an unsafe proximity to civil or military aircraft, positioned themselves in flight paths, or otherwise posed a direct threat to the flight safety of the observing aircraft.”

Furthermore, although none of the UAP sightings have been directly linked to foreign activities, investigations into these cases remain ongoing. The AARO emphasizes its dedication to improving domain awareness and understanding of UAPs, stating their belief that as data quality improves, “the unidentified and purported anomalous nature of most UAP will likely resolve to ordinary phenomena.”

###

Document Archive

Fiscal Year 2023 Consolidated Annual Report on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena October 2023 [16 Pages, 1.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.56 MB]

Statement by Pentagon Press Secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder on the Annual Report on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) – October 18, 2023

Yesterday the Department of Defense and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence delivered to Congress the Annual Report on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) as required by the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2022, as amended by the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2023.

Analyzing and understanding the potential threats posed by UAP is an ongoing collaborative effort involving many departments and agencies, and the Department thanks the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and other contributing departments and agencies for their collaborative efforts to produce this report.

The safety of our service personnel, our bases and installations, and the protection of U.S. operations security on land, in the skies, seas, and space are paramount. We take reports of incursions into our designated space, land, sea, or airspaces seriously and examine each one.

The All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) is leading DOD’s efforts, in coordination with ODNI and other government agencies, to document, analyze, and when possible, resolve UAP reports using a rigorous scientific framework and a data-driven approach. This year’s UAP report covers UAP reports from Aug. 31, 2022, to April 30, 2023, as well as any UAP report from previous time periods that were not included in an earlier report.  AARO received a total of 291 UAP reports in this time period, consisting of 274 that occurred during this period and another 17 that occurred from 2019-2022 but had not been included in previous annual reports.  This brought the total cases that AARO has been reviewing to over 800 as of April 30, 2023.

The post DoD’s AARO Office Releases October 2023 UAP / UFO Report first appeared on The Black Vault.

In the ongoing fight for transparency regarding Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP), The Black Vault just encountered additional hurdles that make the effort even more difficult to achieve. A series of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) appeals were filed to challenge the Department of Defense’s (DoD) use of exemption (b)(7) blocking access to various UAP and UFO related documents within the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). This specific exemption pertains to records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, which could interfere with enforcement proceedings.

The Black Vault argued that AARO, along with other past names of similar efforts like the AOIMSG and UAPTF, were not law enforcement agencies. Furthermore, there’s no acknowledged law enforcement investigation that requires the concealment of the requested information.

Last week, the DoD responded to six of these appeals, upholding the (b)(7)(A) and (b)(7)(E) exemptions. These exemptions concern potential interference with enforcement proceedings and the disclosure of techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, respectively, but again the DoD fails to present what “law enforcement” proceeding it would interfere with.

In an OpEd published on The Hill in June 2023 by Marik von Rennenkampff, it was proposed that these denials are “…circumstantial evidence that a law enforcement entity, such as the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General [DoD/IG], is engaged in a broad, and possibly criminal, investigation of the U.S. government’s involvement with UFOs.” Though, no evidence supports this.

The DoD/IG’s “evaluation” is now closed as of August 15, 2023, thus nullifying the (b)(7) exemption use, yet, the appellate authority claims it still applies in their September 29th, 2023, decisions. In addition to that, the Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) stated in a September 15, 2023, letter to multiple Congressman and Congresswomen, “…IC IG notes that it has not conducted any audit, inspection, evaluation, or review of alleged UAP programs.” This statement, unless untrue or a daring but clever use of word choices hiding their “investigation”, rules out the IC IG being the root of a “law enforcement” exemption use. So, it remains a mystery on exactly why the exemption is being cited.

Despite multiple attempts over several months to obtain a comment from a DoD spokesperson regarding the use of the “law enforcement” related exemptions, no response has been received at the time of writing this article. The silence from the DoD adds to the growing aura of secrecy surrounding the UAP phenomena and the government’s handling of related information.

But in a surprising turn, during the appellate review, the DoD introduced even more exemptions not cited in the original FOIA denial.

50 U.S.C. § 3024(i)(1) is a provision in the United States Code that mandates the protection of intelligence sources and methods from unauthorized disclosure. This exemption serves to withhold sensitive information concerning national intelligence activities, methods, or the identities of individuals involved, from being released to the public, ensuring the continued efficacy and security of intelligence operations.

The introduction of new exemptions fortifies the existing barrier between the public and the information on UAP, potentially making any future litigation an even more challenging endeavor. These additional layers of exemption signify a strong intent to keep UAP records shielded from the public eye, and present an even bigger challenge to overcome should The Black Vault decide to proceed to court for the release of this information.

The American public’s significant interest in UAPs and the activities of AARO is mirrored by extensive mainstream media coverage. Under FOIA, balancing this public interest against governmental confidentiality is crucial, yet the scales seem to be heavily tipped towards secrecy in this ongoing saga. It should also be noted, that no current or proposed Congressional legislation will fully overwrite these exemptions. Although proposed amendments, like the “Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) Disclosure Act of 2023”, may aim to open up UAP related records to the public, it does not overwrite any ability by the U.S. government to continue to redact and exempt this information from public disclosure. Documents like the UAP Security Classification Guide (SCG) will continue to allow the full exemption of more modern UAP related material, should the DoD desire to do so. FOIA exemptions, and numerous other statutes, could also still fully apply to older UAP material.

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, Christopher Mellon, also has cited the UAP SCG as a roadblock that Congressional language will not circumvent:

Although this is very encouraging, until & unless the overly restrictive UAP security classification guide is revised, there will be little public benefit as virtually all recent data, including UAP videos, will be classified. Congress should press ahead for this guidance to be… https://t.co/JLQdPQoMka

— Christopher K. Mellon (@ChrisKMellon) July 14, 2023

This battle for transparency highlights a broader narrative of governmental secrecy. Each denial and every newly introduced exemption underscores the substantial hurdles faced in shedding light on the unknown, particularly concerning phenomena that captivate public interest and imagination.

###

The post DoD Amplifies UFO Secrecy Yet Again: Additional Exemptions Reinforce “Law Enforcement” Claim first appeared on The Black Vault.

The documents date from late December 2017 and offer a compelling glimpse into the internal concerns of the DoD about Elizondo saying on television that humanity “…may not be alone,” all while talking about his role studying UFOs within the DoD as the director of AATIP. This video is a breakdown of those documents, however, it is highly recommended the article also be explored for much more information at (Documents available for download).

LIVE STREAM VERSION

The post Ep. #124 – Ex-DoD Intelligence Officer’s UFO Claims Spark Security Concerns & Confusion, Pentagon Memos Reveal first appeared on The Black Vault.

SHOW NOTES

• The CLASSIFIED ‘Mosul Orb’ UAP Case: A New Chapter in Government Secrecy Tactics Unfolds
• Two more case denials

LIVE STREAM VERSION

The post Ep. #123 – DoD Makes Major Play To Block Release of UAP Information first appeared on The Black Vault.

The Pentagon has maintained its silence on the leaked image of the so-called “Mosul Orb” depicting an alleged Unidentified Aerial [Anomalous] Phenomena or UAP seen over an active conflict zone in Iraq back in 2016. The case has been left unaddressed and unconfirmed by the Department of Defense (DoD) since the image and case details first appeared online in January 2023, despite the significant public interest UAP have generated, and the fact that the Pentagon has previously offered commentary on past leaks related to the same. The Pentagon would only say that, “We’re not going to comment on remarks by unnamed sources alleging leaks from a classified report,” in a statement received about the “Mosul Orb” by The Black Vault in January.

The “Mosul Orb”, obtained and released by investigative journalists Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp, shows what has been alleged as a UAP, captured by an MC-12, medium-to-low altitude, twin-engine turboprop aircraft over Mosul, Iraq, on April 16, 2016.

However, a new response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by The Black Vault (23-F-0389), may indicate the classified and sensitive nature of the “Mosul Orb” case, which sheds light on why the Pentagon refused to comment. The DoD states in a FOIA denial letter received today by The Black Vault, that information relating to the case is “classified,” and it also relates to an ongoing “law enforcement investigation.”

The refusal was justified under multiple sections of the FOIA, including ones related to national security, intelligence activities, and law enforcement proceedings, among others​. “The Initial Denial Authority, in his capacity, has determined that the records withheld in their entirety pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(1), which pertains to information that is currently and properly classified in the interest of national security pursuant to Executive Order 13526…” the denial letter stated.

This decision, coupled with the Pentagon’s silence on the matter, adds another layer to the ongoing secrecy surrounding UAP-related information.

The classified nature of the “Mosul Orb” UAP and the lack of commentary from the Pentagon may further suggest an active investigation into the leaks. The “Mosul Orb” is only one of multiple cases published by Corbell and Knapp, that may compromise classified information.

Another leak published by Corbell and Knapp in March 2023, dubbed the “Baghdad Phantom“, may also encroach into classified territory. Although FOIA requests are still outstanding about this specific case, the footage originally shot of a “cylindrical” shaped UAP, and released in the form of six still frame images, is likely classified. The footage was captured by an MQ-9 “Reaper” drone, and according to the Air Combat Command (ACC) when speaking to The Black Vault, all footage captured by that platform is inherently classified.

“In accordance with general operational security practices and the MQ-9 Security Classification guide, all imagery captured by the MQ-9 is typically classified unless mission requirements dictate the need to sanitize any video footage for lower classification or public release purposes,” the emailed statement said. “The MQ-9 Security Classification guide and the details within is not releasable or available to the public in accordance with its own level of security classification.”

The Black Vault further pressed for the classification level of the footage, but that would not be answered by the ACC as they stated, “Per the MQ-9’s SCG, we are unable to provide additional clarity into what kind of level of classification video footage is by default other what was mentioned previously.” ACC further stated, “Air Combat Command is unable to verify the validity of the [Baghdad Phantom imagery]… but U.S. Central Command [CENTCOM] may be a better point of contact.”  When The Black Vault contacted CENTCOM for comment, they stated, “We have nothing for you on this.”

These types of responses indicate the recent leaks of both the “Baghdad Phantom” and the “Mosul Orb” are classified in nature, and that an investigation was, is, or will be, underway given the reaction by the DoD to other recent classified leaks.

The Black Vault has asked the Pentagon about investigation(s) into the leaks referenced above on UAP related imagery, yet the request for comment, and all subsequent follow-ups, have been ignored.

One other aspect of the “Mosul Orb” denial letter was the use of an exemption yet to be seen in UAP related requests to the DoD: (b)(7).

The use of Exemptions (b)(7)(A) and (b)(7)(E) by the DoD in response to a FOIA request for records related to the “Mosul Orb” highlights the DoD’s growing concern when in comes to their involvement in UAP-related matters. The exemptions point towards an ongoing “law enforcement investigation” and reveal an intent to protect the “techniques” used in such investigations. Is this in relation to the leak of material relating to this case? Does that indicate that investigation(s) is/are ongoing? Or is this a broad-stroke attempt to exempt ALL information relating to UAP and/or AARO, essentially thwarting any effort to get this type of related information via the FOIA? That has yet to be seen. However, two related in subject matter request denials from the DoD came within 60 seconds of the “Mosul Orb” denial, which may further shed light on the tactics now employed by the DoD to withhold all UAP-related documentation and AARO-related material. 

These FOIA cases by The Black Vault shed light on the continuing struggle for transparency when it comes to UAP investigations. It highlights the tension between public interest, potential national security concerns, and the ongoing mysteries surrounding these phenomena that have been documented for decades.

Despite the Pentagon’s silence on the “Mosul Orb” case and the UAP issue as a whole, the quest for transparency in UAP investigations remains. The conversation is far from over, as The Black Vault continues to probe and question the nature of these unexplained phenomena and the role of our government in investigating and communicating about them. It remains to be seen how this saga will unfold, but one thing is clear: the call for transparency will continue to grow louder. Or at least, it should.

###

Document Archive

“Mosul Orb” Denial Letter

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [598.84 KB]

UAPx Communications Denial Letter

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [524.88 KB]

AARO Interview of Robert Jacobs and Robert Salas Communications Denial Letter

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [190.18 KB]

The post The CLASSIFIED ‘Mosul Orb’ UAP Case: A New Chapter in Government Secrecy Tactics Unfolds first appeared on The Black Vault.

“Active duty, Reserve, National Guard, and civilian personnel planned and executed the operation, and partners from the U.S. Coast Guard, Federal Aviation Administration, and Federal Bureau of Investigation ensured public safety throughout the operation and recovery efforts.”

This gallery will be updated when new photographs become available.

Gallery

The post High Altitude Surveillance Balloon Shoot Down – A Visual Imagery Gallery first appeared on The Black Vault.

The Black Vault filed a FOIA request for the review and release of the final report on July 12, 2016. It would take until January 6, 2023 for it to be partially done so.

The result is below.

Document Archive

DoD/IG Investigation: Evaluation of Foreign Officer Involvement at the United States Special Operations Command – June 15, 2016 [146 Pages, 11.5MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [11.08 MB]

The post DoD/IG Investigation: Evaluation of Foreign Officer Involvement at the United States Special Operations Command – June 15, 2016 first appeared on The Black Vault.

“Unidentified anomalous phenomena,” is anything in space, in the air, on land, in the sea or under the sea that can’t be identified, and which might pose a threat to U.S. military installations or operations.

“We have an important and yet challenging mission to lead an interagency effort to document, collect, analyze and when possible, resolve reports of any unidentified anomalous phenomena,” said Sean M. Kirkpatrick, the director of AARO.

Since the AARO office stood up this summer, Kirkpatrick said his team there has made significant headway in setting up its mission.

The post DOD Office Moving Ahead in Mission to Identify ‘Anomalous Phenomena’ first appeared on The Black Vault.

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.

The Black Vault filed a FOIA request for this report on September 28, 2016, and it was not released until October 28, 2022. The redacted version is below:

Document Archive

Evaluation of DoD Nuclear Enterprise Governance (DODIG-2016-25) [62 Pages, 13MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [12.79 MB]

The post Evaluation of DoD Nuclear Enterprise Governance (DODIG-2016-25) first appeared on The Black Vault.

Document Archive

JP 3-72, Nuclear Operations, 11 June 2019 [60 Pages, 1.2MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [1.50 MB]

The post JP 3-72, Nuclear Operations, 11 June 2019 first appeared on The Black Vault.

That denial came in November, which I appealed: https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/every-ufo-case-sent-to-uap-task-force-considered-entirely-classified-and-exempt-from-disclosure/

I appealed – and I won.

Next week (week of January 3, 2022), the review of those responsive documents once denied in full… starts again!

That’s a huge win.

Here is a full video breakdown:

The post FOIA Appeal Win May Help UFO Transparency – Here’s the story… first appeared on The Black Vault.

Here’s what he said about the AOIMSG.

The post Pentagon Press Secretary John Kirby on the UAP Task Force Successor, November 29, 2021 first appeared on The Black Vault.

The DARO has been charged with unifying existing reconnaissance architectures and enhancing the management and acquisition of all joint Service and Defense-wide manned and unmanned airborne reconnaissance/surveillance capabilities.

DARO is engaged in the task of benchmarking its fundamental responsibilities and resources. It will create the climate necessary for change by concentrating its energies in the following areas: (a) assessment and tradeoff of system level capabilities; (b) analysis of system requirements to ensure interoperability; (c) development of new and improved sensor technologies; (d) pursuit of Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations; and (e) development of a unifying airborne reconnaissance architecture consistent with other reconnaissance related roadmaps. The architecture will be joint and integrated, address manned and unmanned systems, stress open and digital designs, be adaptable to changing threats and include multi-level secure communications linked into the global network.

In developing an effective unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) program plan, an evolutionary approach is the most prudent course of action given the existing and forecast budgetary environment. An evolutionary approach to the migration of UAVs into the mainstream of tactical reconnaissance capabilities builds on mature technologies, while permitting a “phased” approach to architectural development, testing, and operational employment. A broad range of alternatives exists, and now is the time to make a commitment to a proper mix of UAVs and manned reconnaissance capabilities. These alternatives will be available as developments warrant and simulations validate the interoperability of UAVs and manned aircraft to meet mission needs. Figure ES-1 identifies the major UAV programs that are the primary focus of the DARO. Other UAV systems discussed in this document for completeness and context are shown in relation to the primary DARO programs in Figure ES-2. This initial UAV program plan embraces lessons learned from past UAV programs and builds on recommendations of the 1993 Defense Science Board (DSB) Summer Study on  global Surveillance and the DoD Deep Target Surveillance/Reconnaissance Study to integrate manned and UAV capabilities. Most importantly, this plan highlights the ultimate goal of any military system or plan — service to the warfighter.

Document Archive

Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office (DARO) Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV), Program Plan, April 1994 [170 Pages, 10.6MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [10.70 MB]

The post Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office (DARO) Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV), Program Plan, April 1994 first appeared on The Black Vault.

The below presentation was given by Mr. Dale Ormond PD, DASD(Research) and obtained from the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC).

Document Archive

The Role of the Communities of Interest (COIs), April 13, 2016, Mr. Dale Ormond [17 Pages, 1.0MB]

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [0.98 MB]

The post The Role of the Communities of Interest (COIs), April 13, 2016, Mr. Dale Ormond first appeared on The Black Vault.