Sample documents · Issue B4. Publishing secrets
Template. Sample template for use by or with a licensed attorney. Not legal advice. Laws differ by jurisdiction and change; adapt the document to your facts and check every citation before relying on it.
When to use. A current or former DoD employee or contractor submitting a book, article, or script for prepublication review. Not for: Other agencies, whose review offices have their own rules; adapt the letter.
Deadlines. Submit before any publication commitment; DOPSR publishes its target periods. The follow-up letter in the drafting notes is for overdue reviews.
2 pages, laid out as in the PDF and Word downloads. Select a page to open the PDF at that page.
[Author name, address, email]
[Date]
Defense Office of Prepublication and Security Review [Current address / submission portal]
Re: Request for security review: [title of work] ([book manuscript / article / screenplay / podcast script / testimony / social-media post series])
Dear Review Officer:
I submit the enclosed [work], [number] pages, for prepublication security review under [my nondisclosure agreement(s) dated ___ and] DoD Instruction 5230.09 and DoD Instruction 5230.29.
1. Author. I served as [position(s)] at [organization(s)] from [dates]. I held [level] clearances [and was indoctrinated into special access programs]. The work concerns unidentified anomalous phenomena (“UAP”) and related government activities.
2. Intended publication. [Publisher / outlet], with an expected publication date of [date]. [If a deadline exists, state it and request expedited review.]
3. Sources. The work relies on [my personal knowledge; public sources listed in the enclosed bibliography; official records released by the Department of War, the National Archives, or Congress]. Where the work states facts that have been officially acknowledged, I have identified the official source in the enclosed annotation table so that review can proceed efficiently.
4. Request for itemized reasons. If any portion is found to contain classified information, I request that the decision (a) identify each passage required to be deleted or modified; (b) state for each the classification level and the basis under Executive Order 13526 or other authority; and (c) indicate whether a proposed alternative wording would be acceptable. See McGehee v. Casey, 718 F.2d 1137 (D.C. Cir. 1983). [For a former employee or contractor:] Because I am no longer employed by the Department, I understand the review of this work is “to ensure that information [I] intend to release to the public does not compromise national security as required by [my] nondisclosure agreements.” DoDI 5230.09 ¶1.2.g. Please identify separately any suggested change that is not based on classified or controlled unclassified information, so that I can consider it as a suggestion and not as a condition of clearance.
5. Official acknowledgment. Information that has been officially disclosed is not properly classified merely because it appears in my work. The annotation table identifies statutes (e.g., 50 U.S.C. §§3373, 3373b; Pub. L. No. 118-31, §§1687, 1841-1843; Pub. L. No. 119-60, §§1671-1673), AARO reports, released records, and sworn testimony of officials that disclose the information in question.
6. Other review offices. [If the work may contain information under the jurisdiction of another agency (e.g., an intelligence agency or DOE), please coordinate with that agency, and tell me if I must submit separately.]
7. Timeline. Please confirm receipt and the expected completion date. I understand DOPSR aims to complete review within [current published period]; please notify me if the review will take longer.
I will not publish the work until I receive your determination. Please direct questions to me at [contact].
Sincerely, [Name]
Enclosures: Manuscript; annotation table of official sources; copies of relevant nondisclosure agreements (if available)
Submit early drafts and later changes; any material added after review must be resubmitted.
Social-media posts and interviews about the author’s former duties are within the scope of most review obligations. When in doubt, submit.
If the response is late or a redaction seems unjustified, appeal administratively, then consider an as-applied challenge to specific redactions. Edgar v. Haines, 2 F.4th 298 (4th Cir. 2021), forecloses facial challenges by signatories in the Fourth Circuit but not as-applied challenges to particular decisions.
Follow-up letter for an overdue review. If the review runs past the published period, send:
I submitted [title] for prepublication review on [date] (case number [__]). The Department’s stated period for review of a submission of this kind is [period], which ended on [date]. I have received no determination [and no request for more time]. Please tell me by [date, 14 days out] when the review will be completed, and identify any portion of the work that has been cleared so that I may publish it while review of the remainder continues. I have not published the work and will not publish it while this request is pending. If I do not receive a determination or a completion date by [date], I will treat the delay as a decision subject to administrative appeal and will consider other remedies, including judicial review of the delay.
Keep the follow-up and every reply. A record of unexplained delay is what an as-applied challenge or a court ordering prompt review would rest on.
Keep a complete file; it is evidence of good faith for any later dispute and supports a Snepp defense.