DoD’s Inspector General Office Releases Emails About UAP, Their UAP Evaluation Effort, Luis Elizondo, and More

February 8, 2024

FOIA documents detail Pentagon’s interactions with Luis Elizondo regarding AATIP claims and UAP investigations.
Preparations for Elizondo’s interviews reflect concerns over classified information and legal representation.
An unidentified individual offers insights on UAP evaluation, hinting at insider involvement and further intrigue.
Internal responses to rumors of Garry Reid’s ousting and UFO controversies showcase Pentagon’s secretive dynamics.
Excessive redactions under FOIA exemptions raise questions about transparency in government UAP disclosures.

Randolph R. Stone –
Assistant Inspector General for Evaluations of Space, Intelligence, Engineering and Oversight

A new set of documents has been released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) from the Department of Defense, Office of the Inspector General. The documents, stemming from a FOIA request filed by The Black Vault dated June 28, 2022, was for all communications involving Randolph R. Stone, Assistant Inspector General for Evaluations of Space, Intelligence, Engineering, and Oversight, containing the keyword “Elizondo.” The keyword is drawn from Luis Elizondo, a former intelligence officer, who is known for his claims of running the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), a Pentagon effort that he says studied Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs). His assertions and subsequent public disclosures have sparked widespread interest and controversy over the Pentagon’s UAP investigations and transparency.

The records uncover a series of email exchanges and memos that shed light on the internal discussions and preparations for engaging with Elizondo. Notably, these documents reveal preparations for interviews and meetings with Elizondo, discussions about his clearance levels, and considerations for handling potentially classified information he might share.

Key records from this portion of the release shed light on how they were setting up the proper security measures in order to hear and/or speak about classified information.

Continue scrolling for more...

And although numerous emails were sent and received about this process, the efforts were seemingly shifted, due to the fact that Elizondo was bringing his attorney, who lacks any security clearance, with him. Although the name was redacted in the documents, Elizondo is known to have been represented by Daniel Sheehan.

This concern was pointed out to Elizondo, and the fact that if he was bringing his attorney, no classified information could be discussed. However, this portion of the email was ignored by Elizondo in his response, as he only just agreed to the timeframe set for the meeting.

Another key part of the release was the revelation of an unknown party reaching out to the DoD/IG’s office in regards to their UAP evaluation. This person, with their name redacted, stated that they had been “centrally involved in this from the outset” and had some “thoughts and observations” that they were willing to share. Exactly from the outset of what is unclear.

Other emails show there was likely a meeting setup with this unidentified individual. Additional requests have been filed to unveil more about this meeting.

It should be noted that whomever this is, contacted the DoD/IG’s office just 5 days after the interview they did with UFO Whistleblower David Grusch, as first revealed by The Black Vault just weeks ago. It is unclear if possibly this connection stemmed from the interview with Grusch or the timeframe was a coincidence.

Lastly, a key revelation from the documents ties in to when The Debrief first reported the “ousting” of Garry Reid, the former Director for Defense Intelligence (Intelligence and Security), within the Pentagon back in April 2022. Reid had been rumored to have a “vendetta” against Elizondo, and was the root of the controversy surrounding the Pentagon pushing back on Elizondo’s claims. Reid was also a named party in the IG complaint filed by Elizondo, which was ultimately closed in February 2022 with no action taken against Reid or other named parties in the complaint. Regardless of that decision, Reid became a highly disliked figure within many UFO circles, and the article as published by The Debrief in April 2022 made its rounds within the staff at the Inspector General’s Office when it was first published.

After the article circulated, Randolph Stone, Assistant Inspector General for Space, Intelligence, Engineering & Oversight, reached out to Reid checking in on his employment. Reid responded that same day, and said he was “still here”, with the “same job”, but part of the response remains redacted.

Also the same day, the Deputy Inspector General for Administrative Investigations also checked with OUSD(I&S), and was told the same thing, and stated to numerous individuals inside the Inspector General’s office that the claim was “inaccurate”.

Although Reid was later reassigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), a component of the DoD, the release sheds light on what was really going on behind the scenes.

A significant portion of the content in these documents is redacted under two main exemptions: (b)(5), related to the deliberative process privilege, and (b)(6), concerning personal privacy. The use of the (b)(5) exemption is particularly noteworthy, as it has been applied extensively throughout the documents, obscuring much of the substantive dialogue. This exemption is intended to protect the decision-making processes of government agencies by withholding information that reflects advisory opinions, recommendations, and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated. However, its application here raises questions about the balance between the need for confidentiality in governmental deliberations and the public’s right to understand the activities of its government, especially on matters as compelling as UAPs and all those individuals that come along with that topic.

The excessive use of (b)(5) is being appealed, and the results of that will be posted on The Black Vault, when available.

###