Public Affairs emails with The Debrief

(b)(6)
)
Thank you for your reply and I apologize for not being more concise with my question. In effort to
best clarify this specific question, along with the others I sent you, it's probably advantageous to
share some information I'm attempting to verify, which was provided to me by non-government
sources. If accurate, it could potentially offer an explanation for some of the confusion or contention
you've inherited and had to deal with on this particular topic.
Confidentiality Notice: The following content shall not be disclosed outside the
Government, and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed - in whole or in part- for
any purpose other than to evaluate and/or be utilized by the Government to assist in
the production and/or publication of statements, comments, materials, or information
which is expressly considered for attributable public release. This confidentiality
notice is made in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552 (b)(4) and the Trade Secret Act, 18
U.S.C. 1905.
Recently, I was allowed to examine a "10 Month Report" produced in 2009 by Bigelow Advanced
Aerospace Studies, which I was told was produced as part of their involvement with the Advanced
Aviation Weapons Systems Applications Program (AAWSAP) for the DIA. The entirety of the report
(494 pages) exclusively discussed matters related to UAP. The report is marked as "classified
proprietary information" and did not contain any data or information that was obtained through
Government resources.
Examining the original solicitation for AAWSAP (# HHM402-08-R-0211) it appears the acquisition
was set-aside l00% for "small business," which, to my understanding, would mean non-Government,
non-competitive data produced by the program would be subject to the Small Business Innovative
Research rights clause and restricted from release by the Government unless provided express
permission by Bigelow Aerospace. This is the basis for the third question I was hoping you could be
able to verify - "In regards to the contract award for AAWSAP to Bigelow Aerospace (BAAS) can
you tell me if the data rights granted to the government in association with noncommercial data
collected by BAAS was considered Unlimited; Government Purpose; Specifically Negotiated
License; Small Business Innovative Research; or Limited?"
When it comes to my first question that you asked me to clarify, ultimately I'm trying to determine if
it is possible whether or not someone may using an "unconventional" definition for the word
"foreign" in the stated purpose of AAWSAP. In essence, could the word "foreign" have been coyly
used to incorporate studies related to UAP? Even if this was done solely on the part of BAAS; or is
there other information produced by the AAWSAP program that demonstrates UAP was not a part of
the program?
In regards to my 4th question about Mr. Elizondo, I was given information suggesting in 2011 the
AAWSAP was unfunded, however, it was not "formally closed down." Having taken a particular
interest in the UAP component that's said to have gone on in AAWSAP, while at OUSD(I) Mr.
Elizondo may have unofficially continued to look into UAP events in conjunction with his official
roles within the NPSMS office. I understand it is difficult, if not impossible, for you to try and
provide an attributable comment on what sounds like could an "unofficial" or personal "assignment"
on Mr. Elizondo's part, however, anything you might be able to provide which you think could be
germane to this question would be helpful. Potentially, I should amend my question to also asking if
3