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.
“DI55”38 pages
# Directorate of Air Staff - Freedom of Information MINISTRY OF DEFENCE 5th Floor, Zone H, Main Building, Whitehall, Lond
ENCLOSURE
48
NUMBER
## Dear Dr Clarke
Further to my email of $ 2 4^{\mathrm{th}} $ May, I am now in a position to provide you with an substantive response to your request for the three outstanding documents originally requested in your letter of $ 2 6^{\mathrm{th}} $ September 2005 and the results of our review of the decision to withhold paragraph 3 from DIST's letter of $ 4^{\mathrm{th}} $ December 2000. I will also address your questions in your email of $ 1 3^{\mathrm{th}} $ June. A response to your new FOI request (23-05-2006-100609-001) will be provided separately. Your request for an internal review of our decision to withhold information from the UAP report in accordance with Sections 26 and 27 of the FOIA has been passed to the Directorate of Information Exploitation and they will respond to you separately when the review is complete.
With regard to the three outstanding documents requested in your letter of 26th September 2005, I can advise you that DI55/108/15 dated 22nd January 1997 has already been sent to you with my letter of 23rd August 2005. This document was one of "three associated papers" detailed in paragraph (2) of that letter. You also asked for copies of two other documents from 1993 and 1996 which relate to the UAP study. Following a detailed search of the accessible files, it has been determined that the two documents which are referred to as references B and C in the letter DI55/108/15 dated 22nd January 1997, are actually incorrectly referenced. The documents referred to are in fact D/DI55/162/40 dated 11th December 1996 and D/Sec(AS)12/1 dated 16th November 1993. It is considered that this was an error by the author of the 22nd January 1997 letter and was made as the two documents referred to were found on file D/DI55/108/15 and the author referred to them without checking the references. Although you were informed in my letter of 23rd November 2005 that the first two documents had been found, the second document was in fact the DI55/162/40 letter of 11th December 1996. The third document had, at that time, not been found as it was not then known that the document of 16th November 1993 was incorrectly referenced.
A copy of D/Sec(AS)12/1 dated 16th November 1993 was also sent to you with my letter of 23 August 2005 and is referred to at paragraph (1) of that letter as enclosure 85 from file D/Sec(AS)12/1 Part A. The remaining document (DI55/162/40) has been examined and we have determined that this can now be released. Please find a copy enclosed with this letter. Some details have been withheld in accordance with FOIA Absolute exemption S.40 (Personal Information) and Qualified exemption S.43 (Commercial Interests). Under the terms of the FOIA, in the case of Qualified exemption S.43, we are required to conduct a Public Interest Test on the information that is being withheld. This is to determine whether there is a greater public interest in releasing the requested information or in withholding the information under the Document, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. The text was read from the page images by an OCR model; expect the odd misread word. 160 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.