Documents / Document
This MoD file, titled UFOs - Persistent Correspondence - Dr David Clarke, holds Dr David Clarke's Freedom of Information requests and emails to the Directorate of Air Staff from 2005 to 2008. Clarke asked for the DI55 report on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena in the UK Air Defence Region and for Rendlesham papers. He also sought records about Nick Pope. Other items include an internal review that released redacted passages on plasmas, the MoD's statement that it had no report of the 2008 South Wales police helicopter sighting, and a 2009 disposal form.
“Cabinet Office”2 pages
Read from the scan by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word.
## Section 40 From: Section 40 Sent: 17 November 2005 13:39 To: Section 40 Subject: FW: FOI Policy - Security Classifications ## Section 40 Re para 4 of my draft reply to Dr Clarke, please see my e-mail below and Info-Access advice about telling him what the original security classification was on the DI letter dated 4 December 2000. The only problem seems to be that it was UK Eyes Only. Is the UAP Report and Executive Summary also UK Eyes Only? Section From:Section 40 Sent: 17 November 2005 11:32 To:Section 40 Subject: RE: FOI Policy - Security Classifications ## Section 4 We see no problem with telling the applicant unless there were sensitivities with the original classification (i.e. it is UK Eyes only or something similar) If this is not the case then I don't see that being a problem. Regards, Section 40 Section 40 Info-AccessPol1 Section 40 MB 6/E/11 Section 40 From:Section 40 Sent: 17 November 2005 11:26 To: Section 40 Subject: FOI Policy - Security Classifications Importance: High ## Section 40 Do you know if there is any particular policy regarding the removal of security classifications from released documents?. We have released some documents which were originally classified SECRET but following a FOI request were downgraded by the originating branch to unclassified. On release the original security classification was redacted because it no longer applied and was not therefore relevant. The applicant is a social historian and has asked if he can be told what the original classification was. Section 40 DAS-FOI 5-H-13 Section 40
Document, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. The text was read from the page images by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word. 160 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.