On June 6, 2019, I mailed a notarized FOIA request [DON-USMC-2019-007976] to the United States Marine Corps requesting information on the use of frequencies 1358 and 1358.75 from two California Naval bases. In April of 2019, signals from 29 Palms and Camp Pendleton used to target me with specific magnitudes of power were measured and verified by spectrum analysis.

I learned that these signals, regulated through the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, were granted for use to the Marine Corps under the Department of the Navy [DON] as a point-to-point radar signal in training operations. Conversations with FOIA clerks at the USMC and NAVIFOR provided that the signals had not been utilized for two and a half years at either base, but were in use at C4/ISR and NAVWAR in San Diego.

I placed a second FOIA request [DON-NAV-2020-000362] through the Naval Spectrum Center along with an appeal to John Hannink 10/18/2018, the Vice Admiral and Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Navy.

On 10/14/2019, Navy JAG John M. Dezzani, a commander responded citing “Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 5400.7-r” as one reason the Navy could not process my FOIA request. DoD 5400.7-r references Title 10, United States Code, “Sections 2320-2320, “Rights in Technical Data: and “Validations of Proprietary Data Restrictions” indicating the Navy has “protected third-party relationships” that may permit signal use by the Navy and third party contractors upon civilians.

On 12/13/2019, Dezzani wrote “[b]ecause your request seeks RFA [Radio Frequency Authorization] information, all responsive records in our possession are being withheld pursuant to 552(b)(1) and (3). Exemption (b)(1) protects from disclosure information that has been deemed classified “under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy” and is “in fact properly classified pursuant to such Executive order.” Exemption (b)(3) allows the withholding of information prohibited from disclosure by federal statute. Moreover, to the extent these records contain personal information, such information is being withheld pursuant to 552(b)(6). Exemption (b)(6) addresses personal information that if disclosed to a requester, other than the person whom the information is about, would result in a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

Dezzani’s use of United States Code 552(b) supports the conclusion from DoD 5400.7-r that the Navy has protected third-party relationships with specific vendors. Gathering personal FOIA information about yourself violates the third-party vendor’s privacy-right to target you, the citizen, on behalf of the Navy. The Navy is permitted to target “citizens-turned-enemies of the State” because of 28 USC 1801-1813.

Further, the Executive order referenced and pertaining to the code was enacted prior to 2009 and therefore does not have standing. I appealed Dezzani’s attempted exemption to Vice Admiral Hannink on March 2, 2020. It is now July and I have still received no response from either JAG official.

“The Marines Look to Elevate Signals Intelligence and Electronic Warfare” by Kimberly Underwood

The following are a list of military contracts awarded to NAVWAR where C4/ISR training signals are currently in use:

SPAWAR (Space Warfare) was renamed NAVWAR (Navy Warfare) in 2019. The following documents from SPAWAR in 2018 reveal that contractors who have exemptions and “privacy protection” from the Navy for their role in radiating US citizens include: commercial businesses, manufacturing and academia along with traditional industry partners:

And I’m proud to be an American where at least I know I’m free…