The 2004 Nimitz Generic Brand Elliptical Breath Mint UFO/UAP [Speed, Gs, via radar] (U.S. Navy)

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, I hereby request the following records:

data on the speeds and accelerations of the acknowledged* Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs) sighted by crew members of the USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group in the Pacific from November 10, 2004 to November 16, 2004, with emphasis on the day of November 14, 2004; as well as the UAPs witnesses by crews with the USS Theodore Roosevelt Carrier Strike Group between the summer of 2014 and March 2015 along the East Coast of the United States.

Respecting that the actual radar systems data used to observe and calculate these speeds and accelerations cannot be released, as they could jeopardize national defense and intelligence capabilities by revealing classified technical specifications and etc., it's the hope of this request that some official information can nevertheless be released by the Navy exclusively on the the product of those systems and data with respect to the speeds and accelerations of these UAPs.

* See Here: https://www.navair.navy.mil/foia/documents // https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a32289669/navy-official-release-ufo-videos/

PLEASE NOTE: I am a freelance reporter and would request that the relevant fees be waived. My past work has appeared at Slate.com, the New Republic, the New York Review of Books, Inverse.com, Scienceline.org, Gawker, Earther, Chemical Engineering magazine, and elsewhere.

The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.

In the event that there are fees, 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,

Matthew Phelan

I am appealing this response in its entirety, as the Navy has already disclosed that this documentation exists (see attached FOIA response letter). While sources, methods, and capabilities of the Navy's technology is understandably classified, information on the speed and acceleration of this UAP sighted by Nimitz crew members in 11/2004 should not be.

To Whom It May Concern:

I simply wanted to keep other stakeholders in the loop that I have contacted DoD Navy Component FOIA Public Liaison Chris Julka in an effort to facilitate some dispute resolution services regarding my request. (See FWD:'ed email below.) Please continue with the appeals process and update me on its progress.

Best Regards,
Matthew Phelan

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: matthew phelan <matthew.d.phelan@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 12:55 PM
Subject: Questions regarding my FOIA request, DON-NAVY-2020-008334, now under appeal.
To: <christopher.a.julka@navy.mil>

Hello, Mr. Julka (or Chris, if you'd prefer):

I thought it might be good to start a slightly more personable dialog about my FOIA request, assigned case number DON-NAVY-2020-008334, dated May 27, 2020.
It's the dorky one asking for information about the speeds and G-force accelerations of this mysterious flying "Tic Tac" from the 2004 Nimitz encounter, as reported in the New York Times of December 16, 2017. 

My personal feeling is that there absolutely has to be a way that the Navy can somehow release to me information about the speed and acceleration of this object (UFO) or phenomena (UAP), whatever it was, without releasing any additional details that could jeopardize intelligence gathering methods, technological capabilities, or the like. From a previous FOIA, case number DON-NAVY-2020-001283 pursued by Christian P. Lambright (see attached images), it's clear that classified "Top Secret" slides exist covering some aspects of this "Tic Tac" case, which cannot be released for all the typical national security reasons. 

Technically, I suppose, I am seeking "dispute resolution services" from you in your role as DoD Navy Component FOIA Public Liaison, because I feel that surely some sort of compromise can be reached whereby these speed and acceleration specs are released, whether through heavy redactions to all other content on these slides, or some kind of formal statement on Navy letterhead by a knowledgeable party, or something else I can imagine yet.  

I am going to try to call you about this matter sometime this week, so please let me know if this phone number is still the best at which to reach you: (703) 697-0031 

These are tragic, chaotic times to be living through --- I'm well aware --- between the pandemic and the economic fallout and everything else. So, I hope sincerely you and your loved ones are all safe and well. Thank you for taking the time to read this and for dealing with my request. 

Best Regards, Sincerely,
Matthew Phelan
917.859.1266 (m)

To Whom It May Concern:

This is a second minor update on my appeal, after having spoken to Chris Julka, DoD Navy Component FOIA Public Liaison, on the phone earlier today (approx. 3:00PM-3:12PM EDT).

I simply want to acknowledge that the US Navy has a "duty to segregate" with respect to unclassified, releasable, material contained within documents that are marked classified. See: https://www.secnav.navy.mil/foia/references/Documents/SECNAV%20FOIA%20Inst%205720-42G.pdf
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
5. Duty to segregate. Classification marking on a document does not necessarily exempt the entire document from disclosure under the FOIA. To ensure a requested record is properly and currently classified, a reviewer with the appropriate security clearance and permission needs to review it line by line and reasonably segregate its content into classified and unclassified portions.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
So, to clarify, it is the contention of my FOIA appeal that the velocity and acceleration information documented about the "Tic Tac" UFO or UAP should not be classified, while acknowledging that sources and methods and etc. are justifiably classified.

Best Regards, Sincerely,
Matthew Phelan
917.859.1266 (m)