CBP previous UAS Concept of Operations (CONOPS)
| Tracking # |
CBP-2015-048358 |
| Submitted | July 14, 2015 |
| Est. Completion | None |
MuckRock users can file, duplicate, track, and share public records requests like this one. Learn more.
Communications
From: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
A letter stating that the request appeal has been succesful.
From: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
A copy of documents responsive to the request.
From: Shawn Musgrave
To Whom It May Concern:
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act. I hereby request the following records:
-The Concept of Operations (CONOPS) for unmanned aerial systems provided in fiscal year 2009.
Per "Concept of Operations for CBP’s Predator B Unmanned Aircraft System: Fiscal Year 2010 Report to Congress," June 29, 2010 (available online at https://muckrock.s3.amazonaws.com/foia_files/2010_UAS_Conops_Redacted.pdf): "In addition to incorporating changes to the CONOPS provided in fiscal year (FY) 2009, this document includes the basic operating concept for a joint CBP-U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) maritime variant of the Predator B UAS, named the Guardian."
-The CONOPS for the FY2004 pilot study of UAS operations in the US Southwest Border Region.
-U.S. Customs and Border Protection Unmanned Aircraft System Concept of Operations, Draft Version 1.2, December 27, 2007.
Per "Concept of Operations for CBP’s Predator B Unmanned Aircraft System: Fiscal Year 2010 Report to Congress," June 29, 2010 (available online at https://muckrock.s3.amazonaws.com/foia_files/2010_UAS_Conops_Redacted.pdf): "OAM began UAS operations in FY 2004 with a pilot study to determine the feasibility of using a UAS as an RSTA asset in the U.S. Southwest Border Region. This pilot study included the formulation of initial UAS CONOPS and an evaluation of UAS program needs. [....] These initial CONOPS are reflected in U.S. Customs and Border Protection Unmanned Aircraft System Concept of Operations, Draft Version 1.2, December 27, 2007."
Given that this FOIA is submitted in my capacity as a journalist who has covered CBP extensively, I request that I be categorized as a media requester for the purpose of fees. Here is a selection of my published articles on MuckRock to substantiate my claim that I should be categorized as a media (as opposed to "commercial" or "non-commercial" requester) for the purpose of fees:
I have also been published in a number of other national media outlets on topics pertaining to national security, law enforcement and homeland security processes:
As the requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com and pertains to a matter of considerable public interest, I further request a full waiver of all fees.
In the event that fees cannot be waived, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 20 business days, as the statute requires.
Sincerely,
Shawn Musgrave
From: MuckRock.com
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on July 14, 2015. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: MuckRock.com
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on July 14, 2015. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Shawn Musgrave
Hello -
This request has not been acknowledged since its submission in August, per my records. Please advise immediately as to its status, and provide a tracking number.
Best,
Shawn Musgrave
From: MuckRock.com
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on July 14, 2015. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Shawn Musgrave
To Whom It May Concern:
This is an appeal for constructive denial of the below FOIA request. Out of politeness and deference to CBP's caseload, I have submitted numerous requests for CBP to confirm receipt of my request. Having received no reply, I hereby request that you remand this FOIA to CBP for good faith search and provision of responsive documents, in keeping with the agency's obligations under the FOIA.
Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
From: SUZUKI, SHARI
Dear Mr. Musgrave,
I have opened an appeal for this request. Your appeal case number is: AP 2016-013556.
It appears your initial request was received and assigned case number 2015-048358. The system reflects that your request is being processed by FOIA Division (the office at CBP that handles initial FOIA requests).
We will most likely remand this appeal – but we are reviewing it (along with the other 9 appeals you filed simultaneously).
Regards,
Shari Suzuki, Chief
FOIA Appeals, Policy & Litigation Branch
Regulations and Disclosure Law Division
Office of International Trade
U.S. Customs & Border Protection
90 K Street NE
Washington DC 20229-1177
Direct Dial 202.325.0121
Fax 202.325.0153
From: Shawn Musgrave
FOIA Appeals, Policy and Litigation Branch
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
90 K Street, NE
Washington, D.C. 20229
To Whom It May Concern:
This is an appeal for constructive denial of the below request. Despite having submitted it a number of times via the appropriate channels, I have not received any response. Please remand this request to the CBP FOIA office good faith search and provision of responsive documents, in keeping with the agency's obligations under the FOIA.
Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
From: United States Customs and Border Protection
A copy of documents responsive to the request.
From: United States Customs and Border Protection
A cover letter granting the request and outlining any exempted materials, if any.
From: Shawn Musgrave
To Whom It May Concern:
This is an appeal for incomplete processing of the present FOIA request, CBP-2015-048358.
Where the CBP FOIA office has provided a copy of the 2009 CONOPS for unmanned aerial systems, my August 2015 request encompassed two additional documents:
-The CONOPS for the FY2004 pilot study of UAS operations in the US Southwest Border Region.
-U.S. Customs and Border Protection Unmanned Aircraft System Concept of Operations, Draft Version 1.2, December 27, 2007.
As I submitted in my original request:
Per "Concept of Operations for CBP’s Predator B Unmanned Aircraft System: Fiscal Year 2010 Report to Congress," June 29, 2010 (available online at https://muckrock.s3.amazonaws.com/foia_files/2010_UAS_Conops_Redacted.pdf): "OAM began UAS operations in FY 2004 with a pilot study to determine the feasibility of using a UAS as an RSTA asset in the U.S. Southwest Border Region. This pilot study included the formulation of initial UAS CONOPS and an evaluation of UAS program needs. [....] These initial CONOPS are reflected in U.S. Customs and Border Protection Unmanned Aircraft System Concept of Operations, Draft Version 1.2, December 27, 2007."
I respectfully request that you remand this FOIA back to CBP for processing in full and provision of responsive documents for the entirety of my request.
Best,
Shawn Musgrave
From: United States Customs and Border Protection
A letter stating that the request appeal has been rejected.
Files
pages