DOW-UAP-D092, Department of the Air Force Committee to Review Project Bluebook, 1966-1967

━ PAGE 1 ━

Retire Feb 1966 ПОТАИН 01 10002/00 000 40 W 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 1

━ PAGE 2 ━

A col Stener too DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE OFFICE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (OAR) ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22209 Attendees - meeting with Dr. James McDonald, University of Arizona at the Pentagon 17 April 1967 Lt. Col. Harold A. Steiner, Ass't. Exec. Secre. USAF Scientific Advisory Board, Pentagon, Room 5D982 Washington, D.C. Tele. 697-4648 (Code 11-74648). Col. George Freeman, Chief, Civil Branch, SAFOI-C, Room 4A120, The Pentagon, Washington, D.C. Tele. 697-1128 (Code 11-71128) • Col. Marvin Stanley, Chief, Public Information Division, SAFOIP, The Pentagon, Washington, D.C. Tele. 695-5554 (Code 11-55554) • Room 40922, H. Philip Hovnanian, Program Engineer, NASA Hq. Room F50016, 400 Maryland Ave., S W= Washington, D.C, Tele. 962-4961 (Code 13-24961) • George H. Duncan, Advanced Programs & Technology Manager, NASA Hq. Room 50016, 400 Maryland Ave., S.W. Washington, D.C. Tele. 962-4961 (Code 13-24961) • Dx. Dale W. Jenkins, Ass't Director (Science), NASA Hq. Office of Space Science & Applications Room F50078, Washington, D.C. Tele. 962-4621 (Code 13-24621). Hans Dolezalek, Atmospheric Scientist, ONR Branch Office, 495 Summer Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02210. Tele. 696-3563 (Code 11-63563) • Mr. James Hughes, Head, Acmospheric Science Program, Office of Naval Research, Code 412, Washington, D.C. 20360. Tele. 696-6739 (Code 11-66739). Phillip V. Mitchell, Technical Staff Member, Institute for Defense Analyses, 400 Army-Navy Drive, Arlington, Va. 22202. Tele. 558-1641. Joseph Coates, Senior Staff Member, Institute for Defense Analyses, 400 Army- Navy Drive, Arlington, Va. 22202. Tele. 558-1653. Lynn E. Catoe, Library of Congress, Science & Technology Div., UFO Bibliography Project, Washington, D.C Tele. 967-8088. Dan Taylor, Staff Information Officer, AFOSR (SRGC) Arlington, Va. 22209. Tele. 694-4875. (Code 11-44875)• Maj. Joseph P. Martino, Ass't. Exec. Dir. Research Communication, AFOSR (SRGC) Arlington, Va. 22209. Tele. 694-4875 (Code 11-44875). Dr. J. Thomas Ratchford, Project Scientist, AFOSR (SRPS) Arlington, Va. 22209. Tele. 694-5588 (Code 1145588) • Maj. William Metscher, Physicist, Hq. OAR (RROSP) Arlington, Va. 2209. Tele: 694-5505 (Code 11-45505) • DAN TAYLOR Staff Information Officer NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 2

━ PAGE 3 ━

Dee Autun o Delieo Consul rang Funtelat tre Dannor 32 Certos Tsuo rentdent Kyutam Develsgaone Corporattos 8500 colorada Prende Lato deneo oriente Tasulture for. Derenne Analyaes Artington, Pireloin ceche Le Richard Na Foruss General Elegielo Congene 510 LentAston Avenue TE KOK, NON TORE 100 un tusentan, detropzysionl Conerrazory 60 Orrier, Stroot Combedeao, Tanano ascese 0c55 LO MALLE LA SECO tona, Computer Solences Deper Chent The MD. dorporation 1700 Neta Coreot Sonos, Monica, Colitorate 90:00 Toretg Decinology Dirision 74648 NESSA NW 90306 Docid: 34714841 Page 3 Tale Copy ARINEA (LA 05) mlypter) ADUE (REO. Cara 200t 82596 13 MOUG 2900

━ PAGE 4 ━

TOMORLAS MILAN ATSA8.262 6 1 1956- 3e Cos Msrold Xo Stolnes It dol Nerola &e eletaxe 746N8 2000 sendation to de repressatarines fros univereites. 1u den bens auguresea peltente to serve on the larestigation tena. MODe MENED do chana be asinedel 1o are arsal covenge of the wattre SERO CaLl so Sagon at liest correntence as Area Code NOR - 697-1606 AR 697-0345 18 you vent to distins Sa19 6404/28- Mastesant beeseter NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 4

━ PAGE 5 ━

USAF SCIENELIIC ADVISORY BOARD AD HOC COMTTITE TO REVIEW PROJECT BLUE BOOK Room 5D-1014, the Pentagon 1400, 19 April 1966 MELLING STATISLICS I. Agenda: 1400 Purpose of Meeting 1410 Discussion It Colonel Steiner, SAB ALl attendees 1630 Adjourn II. Purpose and Place: To discuss how best to implement the recommenda- tions made by the SAB Ad Hoc Committee to Review Froject Blue Book. The discussion was held in Room 5D-1014, the Pentagon. III. Those Present and Purpose Thereof: Name Dr. Brian 0 'Brien Dr. Jesse Orlansky Col Robert Burger D/Col Robert Rippler Mes. Sara Hunt L/Col Harold A. Steiner Purpose Chairman Member SAB Secretary Participant Participant SAB Secretary Artillation Consultant IDA ALBSA AYRSTA SAFOI Hq USAP (AMBSA) IV. Reports, Contributions, Proposals, etc. issued, received, reviewed, approved, prepared or disseminated during the proceedings: Reviewed - Report of the SAB Ad Hoe Committee to Review Project Blue Book, March 1966. V. Verbatim Record: (see attached) VI. Certification: These meeting statisties are certified as being true and correct. Sarah a Sleiner HAROLD A. STEINER, It Colonel, USAF Assistant Secretary 1 Atch Record, dated 20 Apr 66 USAF Scientific Advisory Board NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 5

━ PAGE 6 ━

HEADQUARTERS UNITE. ATES AIR FORCE USAF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE & CHIEF OF STAFF DATE 21 April 1966 MEMO FOR: Record The lollowing distribution was made on Memo for Record, 20 Apr 66, regarding UFO Meetlag 1400, 19 April 66, Room 5D-1014: 6 copies made destroyea 12 of 6 - mailed to Dr. Stevers #3 of 6 - sent to It Col Hippler, AFRSTA #i of 6 - sent to Mrs. Sara Hunt, SAFOI 15 of 6 - circulated within in Macter file wi A SA-report. 71 - 111ed as extra copy da AFBBA Destroyed NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 6

━ PAGE 7 ━

USAF SCIENUTFIC ADVISORY BOARD AD HOC COMMITTRE TO REVIEW PROJECT BIE BOOK HQ PID, WRICHL-PATTERSON APB, OHIO 3 FEBRUARY 1966 MARLING SIALISICS I. Agenda: (see attached) II. Purpose and Place: To review the resources, methods and findings of Air Force Project Blue Book and to advise the Air Force as to any improvements that should be made in the program to carry out the Air Force's responsibility. Briefings held in Commanders Conference room at Hig, FTD. Discussions and review of case files held in Project Blue Book office. III. Those Present and Furpose Thereot: Name Dr. Brian 0'Brien Dr. Launor F. Carter Dr. Jesse Orlansky Dr - Richard Forter Dr. Carl Sagen Purpose Chairman Member Member Member Member Affiliation Consultant System Development Corp. IDA GE Company Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory Dr. Willis H. Ware Member Rand. Corporation L/Col John P. Spaulding Brieter SAHOL Dr. Anthony Cacioppo Participant ENED Col Warren Wheeler Participant Maj hector Quintanella Briefer INED Mr. francis Arcier Participant Consultant to FID Col Florian Holm Briefer L/Col Harold A. Steiner SAB Sec Ha USAF (AFBSA) IV. Reports, Contributions, Proposals, etc. issued, received, reviewed, approved, prepared or disseminated during the proceedings: Reviewed : Robertson Report, dated 17 Januazy 1953 Selected case histories from Project Blue Book Distributed: Compilation of Project Blue Book Methods and Case Histories, dated 3 February 1966 V. Verbatim Record: None VI. Certification: These meeting statistics are certified as being true and correct. Idarella Stamer HAROLD A. NER, It Col, USAI Assistant Secretary NW 90306

━ PAGE 8 ━

AD HOC COMMITTEE ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFOs) AGENDA Thursday, 3 February 1966 0800 Welcoming Remarks 0805 0810 Introduction The Air Force Problem 0830 Commander or Vice Commander, FTD Dr. O'Brien, SAB It Col Spaulding, SAFOI Major Quintanilla, FID 1000 1015 1145 1315 Briefing on Project Blue Book Break Review of Selected Case Histories Lunch Executive and Writing Session FTD Staff APPROVED: Harolda Steiner TEINER, Lt Colonel, USAF Assistant Executive Secretary USAF Scientific Advisory Board 22 December 1965 8 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 8

━ PAGE 9 ━

Tor Official Use Only MEMO FOR RECORD 20 April 1966 SUBJECT: Implementing SAB Ad Hoc Committee on Project Blue Book Recommendations 1. The following personnel met at 1400 on 19 April in Room 5D-1014 to discuss how best to implement the reconmendations made by the SAB Ad Hoe Committee to review Project Blue Book. Dr • Bzian O'Brien Colonel Robert Burger, AFBSA Dr. Jesse Orlanaky It Col Harold Steiner, APBSA It Col Robert lippler, AFRISA Mra. Sara Hunt, SAFOI 2. On 5 April 1966, Secretary of the Air Force Harold Brown, in a menorandum to the Chief of Staff, stated that the Committee's recommendations should be accepted and arrangements made for a (sic) scientifle tean to investigate in depth certain selected sightings of UFOs. General Ferguson was given responsibility for implementing the Committee's recommendations and It Colonel Hippler 1e project officer. 3. Although the Committee's recommendation was clear and succinet, Initially there was no unanimous agreement on bow to put this recommendation into effect. A basic question is: (1) Should the contract be with a university or should it be with individuals connected with a university? A great deal of the meeting was taken up discussing these facets of the problem and a clear ansver did not evolve. Therefore, It 1s probable that I, and perhaps some selected members of the Committee, may be asked to meet with Colone. Hippler again. Generally, the concept of using mniversitledor individuals from universities) 1s good. Specifically, however, there needs to be & lead university to coordinate and collate the Investigations. After some discussion, it was suggested that the University of Deyton 1e probably most appropriate because it 1a located close to Hq FID who vill retain management of Project Blue Book. Other universitles were suggested that could provide personnel to give areal coverage of CONUS. They are listed below. Bast Rensselaer, Troy, N.Y. Columbia West Utah Colorado Iowa Univ of Conn. Yale cornet Uhiv of Dayton Carnegle Tech Wisconsio Illinois Chicago Univ of Calif (Berkeley) UCLA Oregon Weshington Rice Univ of Texas Copy Nr 5 01 6 Copies NW 90306 Docid:34714841 Page 9 Ter Orficial Use Only South Vanderbilt Duke Univ of Florida Georgia Tech Univ of Georgla cha truan secrotary Vechnical Director vasst. Secretary. Asst. Secretary Asst. Secretary -Asst. Secretary Admiti. Asst.

━ PAGE 10 ━

For Official Use Only Colonel Hippler pointed out that it will probably be September before he gete the money to implement this plan. Dr. Orlansky pointed out that because of the summer holiday, Colonel Hippler should make contact with the universities before the end of May. 5. Since we are dealing with an emotional phenomenon, there was some discussion about whether universities (1.e., their presidents) would be willing to get Involved with UFOs. Dr. O'Brien suggested that Dr. Stevery as President of Carnegle Tech, might send letters to a few selected university presidents with whom he is acquainted to get some idea of their feelings on this matter. (ACTION: AFBSA). In this way we can Zeara vhat a typical reaction might be and also some of the pitfalls to avoid when contacting other universities. 6. There are still several manswered questions or problem areas: (a) Since the problem 1 99% publie relations,it is essential that the investigating teams have some modicum of skill in press relations. It was strongly suggested that a good solid PIO type (perhaps incognito) be included on the first few investigation teans. This caused quite bit of discussion and a final answer did not evolve. (b) The objective is to have impartial scientists from schools with good reputations that have never been involved with UFOs. (c) Considerable thought must be given to how the contract or contracte are to be written. (a) In order to utilize their talents to the best advantage, It was proposed and accepted that Dr. J. Allen Hynek and Dr. Donald Menzel form the nucleus of a Consultant-Advisor team to work with Hq FTD in determining which sightings the university team should investigate. (e) When teams are selected, it is strongly recommended that they be brought together at some certain location such as Hg FID and given a thorough briefing on what is expected of them. This briefing should cover all of the intangibles and pitfalls that must be avoided in order to give good Air Force publie relations. (f) Another question that was not fully resolved is how AFSC should get into the act. The Cormittee's original thought was that someone from the nearest AFSC base should work with the investigating team. The Committee also reconmended that a member of the OSI might work with the university teame and give them the benefit of their investigating experience. It vas questioned whether this would help or hurt the Air Force effort. Neither of these questions were fully resolved. For Offiolal Use Only NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 10

━ PAGE 11 ━

Orficial Use Only (g) It was pointed out that the National Research Council bad conducted an exercise in Disaster Research which had involved some Investigating teams similar to the ones we are discussing. Although the committee is now defunct, Mrs. Marjorle Wilson, Government Code 1224 - 230/239 has their reporte and will be glad to let us review them. Harold a Steiner HAROLD A• SUCINER, It CoL, USAF Assistant Secretary USAF Scientific Advisory Board 3 Ter Official Use Only NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 11

━ PAGE 12 ━

ACTIOn MEMO ROUTING SLIP NEVER USS MAMALS GINGELATE DatE AFBSA (Mr. Hasert) Cal. Stein Left file with the FILE NOTE AND RETURA PER CON- 1 VERSATIOR SEE ME SIGNATURE REMARKS FROM DATS AFRDQ-P (Mr. Baillie) PHONE 06, 1 Feb 80 and DD Form 86, NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 12

━ PAGE 13 ━

180 Elle Upo COPY AFRDQ-P 31 July 1967 Special Report of the USAF Scientific Advisory Board Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project "Blue Book" USAIRA (DAIT - Mr. David Smith & Mr. Peer DeSilva) American Embassy APO San Francisco 96346 Copies of the subject report are forwarded at the request of Mr. Jesse Orlansky, a member of the Scientifi Advisory Board Committee on UFO's. FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Lonel, USAF fero/Operational Requirements a Chier, Reguirements flans Group Development Plans, DCS/R&D 1 Aten Special Report of the USAD SABAd Hoc Com- mittee to Review Project "Blue Book" ata Mar 66, 2 eys COPY NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 13

━ PAGE 14 ━

INSTITUTE-VOR DEFENSE ANALY IDA August 10. 1867 Mar Peep de SiLva Special nogistonse0oo Countertreurgenty Bane: dus Thai Land Soon To denhaven Woen O9e Manhan and has coricuse on witch Jane nenber vere on chas lahoy ve heato en geranal occasiona about the het i- appeas antongue Then the Ambecadesiond pharacher native or the croninden ne bian desecure the tea ores asked ane Solent fig davisory, noar preparede repopus thought get miche he interested ten chas naporerand pavel asked cheroke Secreparesve gend venue copy, Case sue Deporteen the nosetser cousion conte pecause of manesourcess che most gerong tended to be incomplete ang napsi to examine inpapa ally, sorent outly and in creat detail petered mander an sautrangem don't elaborane on the concl panet then consen prep che coma cuce concluded occue velto planationderine e garage inveed inaciona Made cong on ond not tave tie time to examine he way an visor che helicopter alchoing were, collaeted and evaluated and ere now saponto suggest tapesthe pesters priced ons aren Morose orange goyen at may even pe, chat the whole metter de mot ри раве часее том пом сонат Полое went aboue, net pune ten An continet waste ven toche unaver itsof colorado and to nopose Deepectee come time this Tan Conven premargons a copy at the report was also venero Cave Cunw Respected yo 61200 Maste Orlans Naman 00ap NW 90306 Docld: 34714841 Page 14

━ PAGE 15 ━

NEMORANDUM FOR RECORD 18 May 1966 SUBJECT: Conversation with Dr. Stever Concerning SAB Support to USAF Investigations of UPOs 1. Oa 17 May I discussed SAB support to USAF investigations of UPOs with De. Stever. In a previous letter (dated 21 April 66), we had asked Dr. Stever to infomally query some of his university-president colleagues to determine the best modus operaadi for epproaching universities and asking then to provide people and resources to investigate scientifically selected UTO sightings as recommended by the SAB Ad Foc Committee, This meno docunents his findings and conclusions on this matter. 2. On the basis of his infornal contacts with university presidents, Dr. Stever believes the Air Force will get mixed reactions to its request to universities. On the negotive side of the picture, he has gleaned these generel reactions: a. It may be against some school's polley to make contractual arrangements with the government. b. Some universitles will have no interest or bave any qualifled lavestigators. 3. On the positive side, the following reactions vere received: a. Some unversities will do the job under contract. b. Some would like to do the job from a research aspect. (NOTE: Dr. Stever cormented that this may be the "foot in the door" approach to request additional research funds for work at the university that may be construed to be related to the UFO investigation.) 4. Dr. Stever believes that, as a whole, the smaller niversities will be more receptive then the larger ones. 5. Dr. Stever has had some second thoughts on the SAB (specifically, him) sending the initlal letters to the selected universities. He believes that the letter should come fron and be signed by an action office within the Air Force. The letter might reter to the recommendations of the SAB scientific committee as a basts for the Air force actions to initiate a more scientific approach in future selected UPO investigations. In other words, instead of a letter from a college president to a college president, Dr. Stever felt the Air Force could male & very acceptable case if it framed its letter around these two points: .. The value of pertielpating in such investigations to the school, and b. The value to the Air Force and the nation. NW 90306 Docld: 34714841 Page 15

━ PAGE 16 ━

6. Dr. Stever stated that he would be happy to review and critique the draft letter from a university president'a vievpoint. 7. Dr. Stever also suggested that OSR could probably advise which miversitles are most likely to cooperate and since most mniversities have had dealings with OSR, perhaps that organizetion could ofter some advice on the Initiel letter and maybe even send the letter fron that office. Coher eugen ROBERT J. BURGER, Colonel, USAF Secretary USAF Scientific Advisory Board Copies to: Lt Col Hippler, APRST Mrs. Hunt, SAPOI Dr. Brian O'Brien 2 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 16

━ PAGE 17 ━

21. A9т$1 3966 1. 3ogs 05 the seshers, aresons althe meeting as 19 Asp, have hel pose arter-thongie Notes & believe pos should constant- satetelest Shought do not betas ciren do noy che Air force ts gotog to taylesent, the Mea: бресь кому к доу та 10 волу на со 100 See onling teng Met thods Fores coolla des tro or three commitanto Dron the pendenie connity, Ug A93C, end YID sogether poshanice of Ste protten and avoid the picretie and mgaries toss 4. Raptaen aces of possibs to the lou besupca Mug tod Sensaber Sor the progen could thapugh the desers agains, chas pected, think the wrote out du dispassed in che pierrot, more. Condest Most MOLE A TERENON, 40 CANO UNAR TOLD SORROTE ANTRODORE NW 90306 Docid:34714841 Page 17

━ PAGE 18 ━

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FOR WASHINGTON OFFICEOF THE SECRETARY APR 5 1950 Russor ROC Ictor Mill SAFCI MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Attached is a copy of the Special Report of the SAB Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project "Blue Book." I believe that the Committee's recommendations should be accepted and arrangements made to contract for a scientific team to investigate in depth certain selected reported sightings of UFO's. . If you concur, General LeBailly can work with General Ferguson and AFSC in making the arrangements. Mobile: 57035 Harold Brown LCHIPPLED RSTA Attachment RDC--70 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 18

━ PAGE 19 ━

DEPART ENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR STAFF • IMARY SHEET SIGNATURE (Sumame and Orado) TO ACTION SIGNATURE (Sumeme and Grade) TO Lt Gen Ferguson ACTION AFRDC 2 4 9 10 PHONE 78845 SURNAME OF ACTION OFFICER AND GRADE It Colonel Steiner SYMBOL TYPIST*S INIT. SUSPENSE DATE AYBSA SUBJECT SAB Ad Hoc Cormittee Report DATE 30 March 1966 SUMMAR Y 1. Attached for your signature is a letter transmitting to General LeBailly the Special Report of the SAB Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project Blue Book. 2. The Cormittee was formed and the report is being submitted in response to General LeBailly's memorandum to you on 28 September 1965 (Atch 2) requesting that the SAB review Air Force Project Blue Book. The objective of this Investigation was to determine if and how the Air Force could improve its program for investigating UPO's. The Committee concluded that the program can be improved by conducting a more thorough scientific investigation of questionable sightings, and recommended a method for doing this. 3. Recommended distribution 1s: Number of Copies 25 SAFOI AFRDC Committee Members 1 each Commander, FTD 5 APSC DCS/Foreign Technology 2 SAB Secretariat 2 Chairmen, SAB 1 4. After your signature and approval of the recommended distribution, we will appropriate action to forward the copies of the report. tobert игде ROBERT J. BURGER, Colonel, USAF Secretary USAF Scientific Advisory Board 2 Atch 1. Ltr of Transmittal 2. SAFOI Memo, 28 Sep 65 AFHQ MAR #2 50 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 19

━ PAGE 20 ━

LASA Слен: 960 SAS Berley of Froject Bluo Doc: Ms fox Genend 3, B. LeBallly 1. Pose zaten to you noondo to me on 26 Coptenber 1965 requesting & revier of Project Blue Book by the USA? Sotentifie Advisory Done. 2. In response to your ripest, the SAl fated an ed hou counittee under Drs Brimo 0'Zrlon to inventiente the odecracy and tronlinene ol Project Bino 300k, The Grantotee a soport recommas a prosoline for streethening the notentific inreatiation of quostsonite sightlass of Wros- 3- Prenty-five copies of the toport are being putatad, for you Fence Let us Knov tE the 84% cun be of further asstatanse ta tits matter. Signed MaLtazy Director THAT SodentiAte Adriadey Dourd Esport: (25 cro) NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 20

━ PAGE 21 ━

DEPART NT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR STAFF & WARY SHEET SIGNATURE (Surname and Grade) TO ACTION SIGNATURE (Surname and Grade) 1 3 TO ACTION Gen Ferguson Mi1 Dir, SAB 8 5 SURNAME OF ACTION OFFICER AND GRADE Col Burger SYMBOL AFBSA SAB Information/ Action Item 10 PHONE 74811 TYPIST*S INIT. al SUSPENSE DATE DATE SUBJECT 5 October 1965 SUMMAR Y 1. This request arrived in our office today apparently without your seeing it. 2. I discussed it briefly with Dr. Stever and his initial reaction was lukewarm. He questioned the value of a review of the UFO pro- gram by the SAB. He suggested that we might talk to some other SAB members knowledgeable in this area to get their opinion on the value of such an SAB undertaking. We thought of Brian O'Brien (FTD/DAG) , Jesse Orlansky (Psychology), Dick Porter (Geophysics), and possibly Court Perkins and Dr. Markey. 3. Before we do this, however, Dr. Stever thought we should get your views on this to see if perhaps there is some additional information or facts which would give a clue on why the request was made. cover urges ROBERT J. BURGER, Colonel, USAF Secretary USAF Scientific Advisory Board Atch Memo on UFOS Lets trinis this up at Exce Crite mustang nor. TABC, FORM AFHO MAR M 50 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. NW 90306 Docld: 34714841 Page 21

━ PAGE 22 ━

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY SEP 2 8 1965 MEMORANDUM FOR MILITARY DIRECTOR; SCTENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD SUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects (UPOs) In keeping with its air defense role, the Air Force has the responsibility for the investigation of unidentified flying objects reported over the United States, The name of this project is Blue Book (Attachment 1): Procedures for conducting this program are established by Air Force Regulation 200m2 (Attachment 2) • The Air Force has conducted Project Blue Book since 1948. As of 30 June 1965, a total of 9267 reports had been investigated by the Air Force. Of these 9267 reports, 663 cannot be explained. It has been determined by the Assistant Deputy Chief of Stafs/ Plans and Operations that Project Blue Book is a worthwhile program which deserves the support of all staff agencies and major commands and that the Air Force should continue to investigate and analyze all UFO reports in order to assure that such objects do not present and to reporte in a peo a threat to our nationa. security, The Assistant Deputy Chiet of Staff/Plans and Operations has determined also that the Foreign Technology Division (FID) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base should continue to exercise its presently assigned responsibilities concern ing UFOS • To date, the Air Force has found no evidence that any of the UFO reports reflect a threat to our national security. However, many of the reports that cannot be explained have come from intelli gent and technically well qualified individuals whose integrity can- not be doubted. In addition, the reports received officially by the Air Force Include only a fraction of the spectacular reports which are publicized by many private UFO organizations. Accordingly, it is requested that & working scientific panel composed of both physical and social scientists be organized to review Project Blue Book - Its resources, methods, and findings and to advise the Air force as to any improvenents that shoula be made in the progran in order to carry out the Air Force's assigned responsibility. 5 5 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 22

━ PAGE 23 ━

Doctor J. Allen Hynck who is the Chairman of the Dearborn Observatory at Northwestern University is the scientific consultant to Iroject Blue Book, He has indicated a wilingness to work with a panel in order to place this problem in its proper perspec- Doctor Hynek has discussed this problem with Doctor Winston R. Markey, the former Air Force Chief Scientist- E.B: E. B. LeBAILLY Major General, USAF Director of Information 2 Attachments Blue Book Report 2: AFR 200-2 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 23

━ PAGE 24 ━

col manci info del INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSE ANALYSES Science and Technology Division IDA 400 Army-Navy Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22202 • Telephone (703) 558-1000 February 13, 1969 It. Colonel Harold A. Steiner, USAF Assistant Executive Secretary USAF Scientific Advisory Board Department of the Air Force Headquarters United States Air Force Washington, D.C. 20330 Dear Hal, I appreciate your thoughtfulness in sending me a copy of the Condon Report on UFO's. He and his group seem to have done a tremendous job, just about what our committee thought was needed. I guess we were very lucky to have reviewed the situation in such timely fashion in 1966. The fine endorsement of his work by the National Academy of Sciences confirms that Condon has done what was needed. It is a pleasure to see this fruitful outcome to our recom- mendation and I appreciate having the report. Jere NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 24

━ PAGE 25 ━

SOC UFo SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 2500 Colorado Avenue • Santa Monica, California 90406 February 28, 1969 Nos col manci Lt. Colonel Harold A. Steiner USAF Scientific Advisory Board Headquarters U. S. Air Force Washington, D. C. 20330 Dear Colonel Steiner: Thank you very much for sending me the Condon Report and the National Academy of Sciences review of the report. I have not yet had time to read the com report but have glanced through it, and it certainly seems comprehensive. The National Academy review certainly gives it good credibility and ought to take care of any serious criticism. Cordially yours, Launor. Carter Vice President and. Manager Public Systems Division LFC: db NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 25

━ PAGE 26 ━

20330 12 February 1969 Dr. B. Guyford Stever President Comegle-Nellon Univeraity Pittsburgh, Penasylvania 15213 Dear Dr. Stever I am pleased to send you this personal copy of the Condon Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, No doubt you will be surprised, as I was, at the depth of the University of Colorado study. Little could we guess when the Q*Brien SAB Connittee net in February 1966 that it would serve an a springboard for this voluninous effort. Pereonally, I an satiafted with the resulte of the study and belleve it puts the Air Force in an excellent position to counter eritician. Sincerely HAROLD A. STEINER, It Colonel, USAF Assistant Executive Secretazy USAT Scientifle Advisory Board 1 Atch Condon Report (3 Vols) LtCol Steiner/dd/12Feb69 OK MarC 169 1211 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 26

━ PAGE 27 ━

20330 6 February 1969 Dr • Brian 0'Brten Consulting Physicist Box 52 North Woodstock, Connecticut 06257 Dear Dr. 0*Brien I en pleased to send you this personal copy of the Condon Report on Undentified Flying Objects- No doubt you vill be suprised, as I vas, at the depth of the Inlversity of Colozado study» Ilttle could we guess when we met as & committee in February 1966 that a by product would be these voluntnous documenta, Personally, I a satisfied with the contente and belteve the Air Force got its money's worth. I an happy to have served with you in this exercise and I hope that you feel as I do that it was worthwhile. Sincerely HAROLD A. STEDIER, It Colonel, UNAP Aeststant Executive Secretary USAT Scientific Advisory Board SAME LETTER TO: Dr. Launor F. Carter Mr. Jesse Orlensky Dr - Richard Porter Dr. Carl Sagen Dr • W1ll1s H. Ware * Atch Condon Report (3 Vols) NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 27

━ PAGE 28 ━

20330 27 February 1968 AFBSA Request for Project Blue Book Material Mr. Don Berliner National Investigations Comittee on Acrial Phenonens 1536 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 This to la response to your viole on 26 February 1968 during which you requested we provide you with Project Blue Book material. I have bem advised that we can provide you with coples of the material you requested at a cost of $5,00. IE you are still interested in obtaining copies, please make your check or money order for that amount payable to the "Treasurer of the United States" and send it to this office. HAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Colonel, USAF Asalatant Executive Secretary USAr Sclentific Advisory Board lake 27 Tub 1468 NW 90306 Docld: 34714841 Page 28

━ PAGE 29 ━

20330 1 March 1968 AFBEA Project Blue Bool Material Mr. Don Berliner National Investigations Comttee on Aerial Phenomena 1536 Comnecticut Avenue, AW Washington, D. C. 20036 1. Thie 18 in response to your letter of 28 February 1968 requenting and poying for material prepared for the USAY Sclentifle Advlsory Board a no pro bet nu Coples of this nterial are attached. A fee of $5 was based on the unit cost al 25% per page plus $3 per hour labor. HAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Colonel, USAF Assistant recutive Secretary USAF Eclentific Advisory Boura I Ateb Project Blue Book Material fabe Mach 1968 SExt Seat NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 29

━ PAGE 30 ━

NATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS COMMITTEE ON AERIAL PHENOMENA WASHINGTON. D. C. 20036 Feb, 28, 1968 MAJOR DONALD E. KEYHOE USMG (RET.). DIRECTOR GORDON I. R. LORE, JR. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR 1536 CONNECTIVE ANGE N.W. TELEPHONE: (202) 667-9434 It, Col, Harold A. Steiner Assistant Executive Secretary USAP Scientific Advisory Board HQ, USAP Washington, D.C. 20330 Dear Col, Steiner: Enolosed is my personal check for $5.00 to cover the cost of reproducing the pages of Project Blue Book material which we discussed on Feb. 26. Many thanks for your cooperation. Incerely, Don Berliner NICAP Staff A privately supponted fad finding body sensing the national public interest NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 30

━ PAGE 31 ━

20330 AFDASBA/SSgt Ehrlich/74835 Request for Project Bluebook Reporte 20 Tob 68 Mr. Don Berliner National Investigationa Committee on Aerial Phenomena 1536 Connectiout Avenue Washington, DO 20036 1. Reference your request directed to SAF-OICO for portions of Project Bluebook Reports. 2. We maintain a reference oopy of the material you requested and can furnish you photographio copy at a oost of $12.75. If you are inter ested in purchasing a copy, please make your cheok or money order payable to "Treasurer of the United States" and remit to this office. ELLIS F. VILLIARD Chief, Information Branch Direotorate of Administrative Serviods 25 20 5.00 19 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 31

━ PAGE 32 ━

INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSE steiner ANALYSES Research and Engineering Support Division IDA 400 Army-Navy Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22202, Telephone (703) 558-1000 July 27, 1967 Mr. Chester N. Hasert Acting Executive Secretary USAF Scientific Advisory Board Room 5D1014, The Pentagon Washington, D. C. Dear Chet: When I was in Thailand last week, I spoke to several men at the U.S. Embassy who told me about an interesting problem that faces them. Very simply, the Thai government has made numerous reports of mysterious helicopter flights in the North- east part of the country near Laos, an area in which Communist terrorists have been increasing their activity. Although the members of the U. S. Embassy take these reports very seriously, they have never been able to authenticate a single valid sight- ing. I would not have given this matter any further thought except that someone said the reports of these sightings were very much like the reports of UFO's meaning, thereby, that one unusual report is likely to inspire additional ones. It seemed to me that the SAB report on UFO's might be useful to these men in the sense that it would provide them with a basis for seeing that a more valid understanding of the problem could require a more thorough examination than has been possible up to now. It is with this suggestion in mind that I hope you will be able to send a copy of the report to two men in the Embassy very much concerned with this matter. They are Peer de Silva and David Smith. Mr. de Silva is Special Assistant for Counterinsurgency and Mr. Smith is Special Assistant to the Ambassador. I hope that it will be possible for our Embassy in Thailand to take advantage of the work done by the SAB committee chaired by Brian O'Brian. JO: mh cc: Dr. H. Guyford Stever Cordially, Jean NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 32

━ PAGE 33 ━

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD 16 May 1967 SUBJECI: Some Notes Concerning a Progress Report on University of Colorado UFO Study 1. On 5 May 1967, members of the University of Colorado UFO Investigating Committee presented a "position paper" on the state of their thinking on the UFO Study. This memo is based on verbatim notes taken at that meeting and augments the formal presentation (Atch 1). A report of the Committee's progress up to 31 March is also included (Atch 2). 2. The meeting was held in Dr. Bill Price's office at OSR. The following personnel attended: Di. Edward V. Condon, Univ of Colorado (UOC), Principal Investigator Mr. Robert J. Low, UOC, Project Coordinator Dr. W. K. Hartman, Univ of Arizona, a member of the UOC Study Committee De. WiLliam Price, OSR Dr. Tom Ratchford, OSR Dr. Jesse Orlansky, SAB Dr. Willis Ware, SAB Mr. Chester N. Hasert, SAB It Col Harold A. Steiner, SAB It Col Robert Hipoler, AFRSIA Mr. Charles K. Reed, Nat Acad of Sciences Mr. I. V. Brasher, OSR Procurement Mr. Dan Taylor, OSR Publie Information 3• The basic problem contronting the UOC Study Committee is establishing a methodology for investigating UPOs, In the Conmittee's opinion, previous investigations have produced few, if any, tangible results because these studies have primarily been concerned with investigating sightings. According to the UOC. Comnittee, the basic guestion is not the sighting per se but how to interpret the data obtained from reports that are generated from sightings. Thus, additional sightings as currently handled by Project Blue Book (NOTE: no criticism of Project Blue Book was inferred) will not. give the Committee a better picture of what UPOs really are. Something else is needed. 4. Admittedly, il better data were available (l.e., those obtained with spectrometers, magnetometers, ete.) they could undoubtedly give the Com- mittee a better insight into the UFO problem, but in the 18 months allotted for the study the probability of the UOC Committee getting significantly better data is small. The possibility of getting actual, real-time data with spectrometers, magnetoneters, ete., is highly unlikely. Ergo, Che concept of having specialized, instrumented teams standing ready to move quickly into an area where UFOs were or are being sighted and obtain actual ,ceal-time data does not appear likely to produce much. To NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 33

━ PAGE 34 ━

substantiate this conclusion, the UCC Committee cites the experience of NICAP teams of "enger amateurs" armed with cameras, magnetometers, and other specialized instrumentation who have gone instantly to sighting zones and attempted to obtain actual data. Despite their zeal, these teams apparently have never been able to obtain actual, real-time data. The conclusion, therefore, is that the UOC Committee will have to work with data that are avatlable (f.e., reports from those who have sighted UFOs) and attempt to interpret those data so as to obtain a better under- standing of UPOs. 5. Although the vOc Committee will deal primarily with data from reports, this will not preclude some team investigations of current sightings of special interest. Primary and back-up teams each consisting of two members (a physical scientist and a social scientist) are now being equipped with suitable instruments (1,9., Gieger counters, binoculars, cameras, maps, almanacs, ete.). These teans will be on stand-by alert at colorado to Investigate sightings of special interest. One unresolved question is how to determine which sightings to investigate. These teams will not be decentralized because the transportation from Denver to any part of the United States is adequate. After listening to this briefing, one cannot avoid the conclusion that the actual field investigations will be low priority items and will be played in low key during this investigation. 6. Discussion on the teams' activities led to another question basic to the Air Force approach to the UPO problem and one that the UUC Cormittee hopes to provide answers to--is a large field organization composed of an Investigating officer at each Air Force base worthwhile? It such a system does not produce worthwhile, tangible results then the Air Force does not need it. If such a system does produce results then perhays the Air Force needs to refine its reporting and investigating procedures, 1.e., Project Blue Book and AFR 80-17. The Committee has developed an improved reporting torm in consultation with psychologists to be used to obtain data from future sightings. Project Biue Book might find this useful. 7 Some interesting aspects of the UOC Committee's approach to the inves- tisation are: An attempt will be made to establish reliability of the reports and/or reporters. UCC wants to know how many are reliable, how many are accurate. b. The Committee will assume some hypothesis that UPOs may exist. They will then try to determine how much evidence supports the probability Director of NICAP. His is an active hypothesis whereas MeDonald's is passive. According to the Committee, Hall definitely believes UFOs exist and are extra-terrestrial, solid objects. McDonald also believes they exist and are of extra-terrestrial origin but arrives at his conclusion NW 90306 Docld:54714841 Page 34

━ PAGE 35 ━

"by remainder" after eliminating all other possibilities of terrestrial and divine origin and leaving extra-terrestrial as the only alternative. At this time, the UOC Comnittee apparently favors the Hall hypothesis. c. Data from sightings are being put on punch cards. The coding system can be expanded up to 50 cards per sighting. All reports of sightings after L January 1907 are being computerized. For cases prior to 1967, the Comnittee asked NICAP to pick out cases they believe should be included in the computer analysis part of the investigation. When viewpoint. 8. There will be 21 senior scientists associated with the UOC project. 9. In my opinion, one of the most interesting and potentially beneficial facets of the Committee's investigations is the sub-contracts with various agencies and individuals (1.e., SRI, Ford, RAND, NCAR, etc.) to study such phenomena as illunination, visual perception, fireballs, radiochemistry, ball lightning, ete., as they apply to UPOs. 10. CONCLUSIONS: After listening to the UOC briefing and discussing the matter intormally with others, I do not, believe the SAB Ad Hoc Committee should pursue this matter further at this time. The JOC Committee seems to have a fairly good grasp of the problem, and I do not see what useful purpose the SAB Committee can serve. Later in the calendar year after the UOC Committee has gained experience and analyzed some data, it might be useful for us to convene at Boulder for a series of formal briefings on the results and scope of the investigation. I can see a useful purpose for such a meeting. Since in a sense the UOC Committee is a brainchild of the SAB, the SAB Ad Hoc Committee could review the UOC Cormittee's progress and serve as a useful "devil's advocate" or sounding board to help estab- lish credibility. The SAB could also suggest new directions where warranted. This type of SAB action would, of course, have to be done with the sanction 01 De. Stever, OSR, and Dr. Condon. Sarolla.& leiner 1, It Colonel, USAR Assistant Executive Secretary USAT Scientific Advisory Board 2 Atch 1. Comments by UOC Committee 2. Progress Report 3 NW 90506 Docld:34714841 Page 35

━ PAGE 36 ━

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD 10 August 1966 SUBJECT: Visit by Mr. William P. Wietzel, NICAP . Today I was visited by Mr. Willian Wietzel, an investigator for the National Investigating Committee on Aerial Phenomena. Mr. Wietzel did not have an appointment but just dropped in, presumably to discuss the report of the SAB Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project "Blue Fook." we did; however, the discussion soon deteriorated to an inditement of the way in which Major Quintella had handled the Ravenna, Ohio, UFO siting in April 1966. With regard to this particular siting, the main criticism of Major Quintella seems to be that his interviews with the people who hed sited the UTO were restricted to about three minutes each via the telephone. However, in all fairness, it should be pointed out that Major Quintella did visit the scene of the Ravenna siting at a later date. 2. I neither concurred with Mr. Wietzel's opinion of Major Quintella nor did I defend Major Quintella strongly. I did point out that, hopefully, the university teams now being formed will provide scientific information that can eliminate the type of personality conflict that apparently exists between NICAP and Major Quintella. 3. There was some additional discussion of the pertinent information con- cerning the Ravenna siting of which Mr. Wietzel was a principal NICAP investigator. He has completed a lengthy and voluminous report of this siting that is impressive in size if not in content. I asked Mr. Wietzel II NICAP investigated every UFO siting as thoroughly as they had apparently investigated this one. The obvious answer was no because VICAP has limited resources. I then pointed out that the Air Force also has Limited resources and cannot spend as much time on each UnO siting as it would like. We parted amiably at an impasse. He did not convince me, and I certainly did not convince him. 1-00 HAROLD A. STRINER, It Colonel, USAN Assistant Secretary USAF Scientific Advisory Board N 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 36

━ PAGE 37 ━

The Committe agreed that the present "Blue Book" program is all right as far as it goes but that it le not lovestl- gative enough to satisty the inquisitive scientific mind. The Air Force has been collecting UPO dats for about 18 years but thie data is no good for forming a scientifio or technteal brekground on UPO? It appears that this pro- gran, is presently constituted, could go on ad intinttum without making a substantial contribution on whether there are or are not UTOs. Therefore, If anyting constructive is going to happen, the time has apparently come to change fron an operationel approach to a scientifio type of appronch Durios the 13 veare that the Air Force has been collecting data on UPO sightings members of Moon. Watch Teams and amateur astronomers, who were pursuing rigorous metogr sighting prograns, have continuously scanned large areas of the night sky to obtain scientifle and technical information on natural phenomena. To the beet of the Committee s knowledge none of these observers with a scientific and techntoal background have ever sighted a UP0. The obvious conclusion is that when the sky is obeerved by scientifically- trained or seientifically-ortented personnel, UFOS ATC not observed. Therefore it is bighly unifkely Cor put wnother way, there to a very low probability that the uros that are sighted and unidentified would remain unldentified Verbo commer t mee NW 30506 Docld:34714841 Page 37

━ PAGE 38 ━

11 the incidents vero subject to close scientifio scrutiny. (Source: Dr. Porter) Along with the scientific approach the Aix. Force should conduct sone unannounced controlled experiments, to check out the techniques, It gould also be useful to correlate known natura? phenonona that can be predicted, 1.c., conete, balloons, SAC rofueling, ete., to check out sighting psycho- lody and investigative techniques. (Source: Dr. Segan) The Committee should recontend that statiatical analyses bo made on UTO data. (Sagan) The Comittee should also zecormend that in the event our major recomendations are not bought by the Afr force, the present "Blue Bock" Investigations be more thorough. Tor examplo, cho 3-47 sighting in New Inmpehise vero assumed to be the source of the UFO. However, no attenpt was made to cortelate the time of sighting or place of sighting with tho navigation logs of any of the Badle that vere supposed to be in the area. Such a loose approach soriously degrades the "Project Blue Book" efforts and leaves loop holes that crities of the At? Forces handling of the UTO problem can use to cast doubt on the Air Force's credibility. (Sagan) NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 38

━ PAGE 39 ━

It would be unotul to know how many times SPADATS sighte unidentified objecte with their radar. Is this number small on large? In either case, it means sonething dif- terent. If the number 1s large then this gives emphasis to the suppositton that there are a large number of poten- tial Us in the atmosphore. If the number is significantly. sua11 then because SPADATS is continuously seanning the skys, this tends credance to the supposition that Ufos are Iigments of emotional peoples iniginations. A short review of the findings of the scientitio groups who have worked on the UTO problen should be made available so that any new effort undertaken does not have to discover the wheel a12 over again. (Carter) The Alt Force should perhaps send lettere to local police departuents os, better stall, when appropriate elve a short briefing to police agencies asking for their responsible cooperation in the "Project Blue Book" effort. Undoubtedly, this would cause the number of sightings to zise becnuse of the notional response of the public. However, local police usually have a good public lunge so their value in helping the Air force Improve its statue should be weighed in light NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 39

━ PAGE 40 ━

of the probable increased number of sightings. Also such an approsch would give munition for the critics to chide the Air. force for belatoly rocognizing & problem that they (the so called "flying saucer buffs") havelnown about for years idi In any case, press releases and publie relations would have to be handled in an extremely skillful manner. Dr. Caccioppo coumented that any requirement for inereased resources to study the UlO problem might cause DIA to recommend cancelation of the whole UTO project in their next budget review. ----- Fron my rough notes I gather that the Connittee finally decided to reconmend that the Air Force form teams at universities located strategically around the country. These teams would work closely with the local Air force re- presentative from the nentest Air Force Base to investigato UrOs. The Croup would investigate only those UrOs sightings. that do not lend themselves to rapid and positive identi- fication. The teams would be made up of at least one psychologist, who has nd interytew expertenes, and one on more physical setentiats (astronomers, physicists, ste.) • NW 90306 Docid:34714841 Page 40

━ PAGE 41 ━

The oapability of the Air Porco representative vas also discussed and it was generally agreed that it would be viso to have someone with dovestigative ability and a modioum of technical experienge as the U1O Project Officor at each Air Force Base. The Local reprosentative of the Air foxce Office of Speola? Investigations (OST) may be a logieal, chotce to work with the unlversity groups when necessary. Bach unlversity would be assigned a spoolite geographic area. A lead university or SO would analyze the date. It 15 estimated that there will probably be more less than 100-150 sighting per yes that will have to be investigated by the university teams. these will probably be randomly Spread over the whole UB so that no one university will be over budened with VIO investigations. NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 41

━ PAGE 42 ━

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, D.C. DETE REPLY TO ATIN OFY 21 January 1966 SUBJECT. Some SAFOI Thoughts for the SAB Ad Hoc Committee on UFOs TO. RECORD 1. On 21 January, I visited SAFOl and discussed the Air Force's concern over the UFO problem with Lt Col John P. Spaulding and Mrs. Sarah Hunt (4a 120 - 79079). 2. SAFOI gets many inquiries concerning the UFO problem. Last year they received and answered more than 3300 letters on UFOs including many from the President and the Congress. The problem essentially boils down to one that is typified by the question, "When did you stop beating your wife?" Any answer the Air Force gives tends to incriminate the Air Force as a concealer of information and at the very least detracts from its image. SAFOl has to cope with this public relations problem and wants something done about it. Therefore they have turned to the SAB. 3. The last time that a group of scientists looked into the scientific aspects of the UFO problem was in 1953. Attachment 1 is a copy of that report. 4. Basically the question is this--is there any such thing as a UFO? When the Air Force receives information on a UFO sighting they have several options open to them. First, they can categorically deny that there is anything such as a UFO. Second, they can cast reflections on the sighters mental ability or claim that he is trying to perpetrate a hoax on the country. Third, they can investigate the sighting as well as possible with their limited resources (3 men at FTD) and admit that the AF is looking into the matter. Obviously, options one and two offer no solution. Thus, SAFOI has to rely on option three, and go through the normal sighting in- vestigation (Attachment 2) that leads to admissions that there are a certain percentage of UFO sightings that the Air Force cannot identify. This approach keeps people like Fuller (see Saturday Review article, Attachment 3) and Major Kehoe in business because it provides them with continuous ammunition and the AF has no rejoiner. NW 90306 Docid: 34714841 Page 42 Underwrite Your Country's Might - Buy U.S. Savings Bonds

━ PAGE 43 ━

5. SAFOI wants some pretigious scientific group to look at the UFO problem in depth and come up with a position that will help get the Air Force off the hook. SAFOI expects to gain a report that will permit them to stand before the most renown critics and say that the AF position on UFOs is sound permit theme or action is being taken to make it sound. 6. The questions that SAFOI wants answered are typically as follows: a. Is Project Blue Book adequate? b. Is there or is there not scientific evidence that UFOs exist? What can be done to make the Air Force position credible? 7. SAFOI claims, and rightly so, that they cannot get to the heart of the public relations problem until they get some scientific evidence upon which to base their opinion. For this reason they are very emphatic that they do not want a "for motherhood and against sin" type of committee report. As far as SAFOL is concerned the problem is critical. 8. As evidenced by the Fuller article in the Saturday Review (which is a prestigious news media that is read by highly influential people both in and out of government), the level of criticism of the Air Force is getting on a higher and higher plane. The recent Wall Street Journal article is another ex- ample of Air Force criticism appearing in a high-class news media. SAFOI clearly defined the criticality of the problem when they concluded by saying that none of the current Air Force problems, such as sonic boom, supersonic transport, and integration, etc., have created the poor public image for the Air Force that the UFO problem does. Nal HAROLD A. STEINER, Major, USAF Assistant Secretary USAF Scientific Advisory Board 3 Atch 1. UFO Report 2. FTD Form 164 3. Sat Review Article NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 43

━ PAGE 44 ━

SECRET UNCLASSIFIED REPORT OF MEETINGS OF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS Not January 14 - 18, 1953 Return DestRoy col steiner DORNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS: DECLASSTFIED AFTEA 12 YEARS. DOS BIR. 5200.10 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 44 UNGLASSIFIED

━ PAGE 45 ━

HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE USAF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE & CHIEF OF STAFF DATE 3 May 67 MEMO FOR: This is an interesting paper! Much s what to recommended to still ppliable today, to one gets the impression that ATIC-or ITD- did not leed the warning of wicreasing public concern for UFOs fanned by percodie ptimulation by publisty- peeking individuals, Lill proper has been made ounce this report dispelling the puber fears of U FOs. h fact most of the recent pubenity, I feel, has done furt the opposite by fanning I think a strong poinh in this gue, to is the port that in all the o have been in the duble sene there never has been any" "Kardevare" evidence acquired. Unters the " littligreen men are really super intellectuals engineering wise I fecl that one of their crash NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 45

━ PAGE 46 ━

would have experienced some sort of diffrulty causing an abort or crash, or pome thing. Aloo, we hear mostly- if not wholly- of sightings orly in the A. S. on No. Anerican foreign "sizeting" data looks like. was this consedered bogs treefed to the Oßrien committee: 883 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 46

━ PAGE 47 ━

¿ADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FOR. USAF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE & CHIEF OF STAFF. DATE. 1 May 62 MEMO FOR: Col Burger Attached is an unclassified version of report of the the ClA sponsored Screntific Aduisory Panel on UFO's. Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty ital Retury NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 47

━ PAGE 48 ━

CRET INDEX UNCLASSIFIED PAGE murpose Part I: History of Meetings of Panel. Part II: Comments and-Suggestions of Panel General On Lack of Danger Air Force Reporting System Artifacts of Extraterrestrial Origin Tremonton, Utah, Sighting Potential Related Dangers Geographic Locations of Unexplained Sightings Instrumentation to Obtain Data Radar Problem of Mutual Interference Unexplained Cosmic Ray Phenomena Educational Program Unofficial Investigating Groups Increase in Number of Sightings Report of Panel Isst of Personnel Concerned with Meetings List of Documentary Evidence Presented 1 7 7 8 9 10 11 15 15 26 18 19 19 23 24 Tab A Tab B Tab C ECRE UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 48

━ PAGE 49 ━

CRET - UNCLASSIFIED 16 February 1953 MOMORANDUM FOR: FROM SUBJECT Report of Meetings of the. Scientific Advisory Panel on 'Unidentified Flying Objects, January 14 - 18, 1953 PURPOSE The purpose of this memorandum is to present: a.. A brief history of the meetings of the. Advisory Panel On Unidentified Flying Objects (Part I), b. An unofficial supplement to the official Panel Report: setting forth corments and suggestions of the Panel Members which they believed were inappropriate for inclusion in the formal report (Part II). PART I: HISTORY OF MEETINGS GENERAL After consideration of the subject of "unidentified flying objects" at the 4 December meeting of the the following action was agreed: "The will: Enlist the services of selected scientists to review and appraise the available evidence in the light of pertinent scientific theories...." Following the delegation of this action to the!' and preliminary investigation, UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 49

━ PAGE 50 ━

good bos UNGLASSIFIED an Advisory Panel of selected scientists was assembled. In cooperation with the Air Technical Intelligence Center, case histories of reported sightings and related material were made available for their study and consideration. Present at the initial meeting. (0930 Wednesday, 14 January) were: Dr. H. P. Robertson, Dr. , Dr. Thornton Page, Dr. Samuel A. Goudsnit, - , and the writer. Panel Member, Dr. Lloyd V. Berk- ner, was absent until Friday afternoon. Messrs. were present throughout the sessions to familiarize themselves with the subject, represent the substantive interest of their Divisions, and assist in administrative support of the meetings. (A list of personnel concerned with the meetings is given in Tab A. WEDNESDAY MORNING The opened the meeting, reviewing CIA interest in the subject and action taken. This review included the mention of the. "study Group of August 1952 culminating in the briefing of the the ATIC November 21 briefing, 4 December , consideration; visit to ATIC! Robertson and ., and concern over potential dangers to national security indirectly related to these sightings. Mr o introductiory Dr. enumerated these potential dangers. Following this turned the meeting over to UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 50

━ PAGE 51 ━

25202: UNCLASSIHED Dre Robertson as Chairman of the Panel. Dr. Robertson enumerated • the evidence available and requested consideration of specific reports and letters be taken by certain individuals present (Tab B). • For example, case histories involving radar or radar and visual sightings were selected for De-Loo-Juhile reports of Greon Fireball phenomena, nocturnal lights, and suggested programs of investigation were routed to Dr. Page. Following these remarks, the motion pictures of the sightings at Tremonton, Utah (2 July 1952) and Great Falls, Montana (15 August 1950) were shown. The meeting adjourned at 1200. WEDNESDAX AFLERNOON The second meeting of the Panel opened at 1400. Lt.L USN, and Mr .. „of the USN Photo Interpretation Laboratory, Anacostia, presented the results of their analyses of the films mentioned above. This analysis evoked considerable discussion as elaborated upon below. Besides Panel members and CIA personnel, Capt. E. J. Ruppelt, Dr-i 1(2-a-2), and Dr. were present. Following the Photo Interpretation Lab presentation, Mr. E. J. Ruppelt spoke for about 40 minutes on ATIC methods of handling and evaluating reports of sightings and their efforts to improve the quality of reports. The meeting was adjourned at 1715. -3- ECRET UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 51

━ PAGE 52 ━

THURSDAY MORNING UNCLASSITED The third and fourth meetings of the Panel were held Thursday, 15 January, commencing at 0900 with a two-hour break for luncheon. Besides Panel members and CIA personnel, Mr. Ruppolt and Dr. were present for both sessions. In the morning, Mr. Ruppelt con- tinued his briefing on ATIC collection and analysis procedures. The Project STORK support at was described by Dr 23 A number of case histories were dis- cussed in detail and a motion picture film of seagulls was shown. A two hour break for lunch was taken at 1200. THURSDAY AFTERNOON At 1400 hours gave a 40-minute briefing of Project IWINKLE, the investigatory project conducted by the Air Force Meteorological Research Center at Cambridge, Mass. In this briefing he pointed out the many problems of setting up and manning 24 hour instrumentation watches of patrol cameras searching for sightings of U.F.0.'s. At 1615 joined the meeting with I expressed his support of the Panel's efforts and stated three personal opinions: a. That greater use of Air Force intelligence officers in the field (for follow-up investigation) appeared desirable. but that they required thorough briefing. NW 90306 Docld: 34714841 Page 52 UNCLASSIFIED

━ PAGE 53 ━

UNCLASSIFIED bo. That vigorous effort should be made to declassify as many of the reports as possible. c. That some increase in the ATIC section devoted to U.F.0. analysis was indicated. This meeting was adjourned at 1700. FRIDAY MORNING The fifth session of the Panel convened at 0900 with the same personnel present as enumerated for Thursday (with the exception of From 0900 - 1000 there was general discussion and study of reference material. Also,. _ read a prepared paper making certain observations and conclusions. At 1000 gave a briefing on his fifteen months experience in Washington as Project Officer for U.F.O.'s and his personal conclusions. There was considerable discussion of individual case histories of sightings to which he referred. Following, - presentation, a number of additional case histories were examined and discussed with Messes. Ruppelt, and' The meeting adjourned at 1200 for luncheon. FRIDAY AFTERNOON This session opened at 1400. Besides Panel members and CIA personnel, Dr. was present. Dr. Lloyd V. Berkner, as Panel Member, was present at this meeting for the first time. Progress of the meetings was reviewed by the Panel Chairman and tentative NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 53 UNCLASSIFIED

━ PAGE 54 ━

TAPED FIE conclusions reached. A general discussion followed and tentative recommendations considered. It was agreed that the Chairman should draft a report of the Panel to that evening for review by the Panel tho noxt morning. The mooting adjourned at 1715. SATURDAY MORNING At 0945 the Chairnan opened the seventh session and subnitted a rough draft of the Panel Report to the members. This draft had been reviewed and approved earlier by Dr. Berkner. The next two and one-half hours were consumed in discussion and revision of the draft. At 1100 the joined the meeting and reported that he had shown and discussed a copy of the initial rough draft to the Director of Intelligence, USAF, whose reaction was favorable. At 1200 the meeting was adjourned. SATURDAY AFTERNOON At 1400 the eighth and final meeting of the Panel was opened. Discussion and rewording of certain sentences of the Report occupied the first hours. (A copy of the final report is appended as Tab C.) This was followed by a review of work accomplished by the Panel and restatement of individual Panel Member's opinions and suggestions on details that were felt inappropriate for inclusion in the formal report. It was agreed that the writer would incorporate these comments in an internal report to the The material below represents this information. the dou area UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 54

━ PAGE 55 ━

SECRET PART' IT: COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS OF PANEL GENERAL UNGLASSIFIED The Panel Members were impressed (as have been others, includ- ing. _ personnel) in the lack of sound cata in the great majority of case historios; also, in the laci of speedy follow-up due primarily to the modest size and limited facilities of the ATIC section concerned. Among the case historios of significant sightings discussed in detail were the following: Bellefontaine, Ohio (1 August 1952); Tremonton, Utah (2 July 1952);. Great Falls, Montana (15 August 1950); Yaak, Montana (1 September 1952); Washington, D. C. area (19 July 1952); and Haneda A.F.B., Japan (5 August 1952), Port Huron, Michigan (29 July 1952); and Presque Islo, Maine (10 October 1952) . After review and discussion of these cases (and about 15 others, in less detail), the Panel concluded that reasonable explanations could be suggested for most sightings and "by deduction and scientific method it could be induced (given additional data) that other cases might be explained in a similar manner". The Panel pointed out that because of the brevity of some sightings (e.g. 2-3 seconds) and the inability of the witnesses to express themselves clearly (semantics) that conclusive explanations could not be expected for every case reported. Furthermore, it was considered that, normally, it would be a great waste of effort to try to solve most of the sightings, unless such action would benefit a training and educational program (soe below). The writings of Charles For were referenced to show - 7- UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 55

━ PAGE 56 ━

UNCLASSIFIET that "strange things in the sky" had been recorded for hundreds of years. It appeared obvious that there was no single explanation for a majority of the things seen. The presence of radar and astro- nomical specialists on the Panel provod of value at onco in their confident recognition of phenomena related to their fields. It was apparent that specialists in such additional fields as psychology, metoorology, aerodynamics, ornithology and military air operations would extend the ability of the Panel to recognize many more cate gories of little-known phenomena. ON LACK OF DANGER The Panal concluded unanimously that there was no evidence of a direct throat to national socurity in the objects sightod. Instances of "Foo Fighters" were cited. These were unexplained phenomena sighted by aircraft pilots during World War II in both European and Far East theaters of operation wherein "balls of light" would fly near or with the aircraft and maneuver rapidly. They were beloved to be electrostatic (similar to St. Elmo's fire) or electro magnotic phenomena or possibly light reflections from ice crystals in the air, but their exact cause or nature was never defined.. Both Robertson and - had been concerned in the investigation of these phenomena, but David I. Griggs (Professor of Geophysics at the University of California at Los Angeles) is believed to have been the most knowledgeable person on this subject. If the ter "flying saucers" had been popular in 1943 - 1945, these objects would = 8- UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docld: 34714841 Page 56

━ PAGE 57 ━

PeReT have been so labeled. It was interesting that in at least two UNCLASSIFED cases reviewed that the object sighted was categorized by Robertson and as probably "Too Fighters", to date unexplained but not dangerous; they wore not happy thus to dismiss the sightings by calling them names. It was their feeling that these phenonena are not beyond the domain of present knowledge of physical sciences, however. AIR FORCE REPORTING SYSTEM It was the Panel's opinion that some of the Air Force concern over U.F.O.'s (notwithstanding Air Dofense Command anxiety over fast radar tracks) was probably caused by public pressure. The result today is that the Air. Force has instituted a fino channel for receiving reports of nearly anything anyone sees in the sky and fails to understand. This has been particularly encouraged in popu- lar articles on this and other subjects, such as space travel and science fiction. The result is the mass receipt of low-grade reports which tend to overload channels of communication with material quite. irrelevant to hostile objects that might some day appear. The Panel agreed generally that this mass of poor-quality reports containing little, if any, scientific data was of no value. Quite the opposite, it was possibly dangerous in having a military service foster public concer in "nocturnal meandering lights". The implication being, since the interested agency was military, that these objects were or might be potential direct threats to national security. Accora- • ingly, the eed for deemphasization made itself apparent. Comments on a possible educational program are enrerated below. UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 57

━ PAGE 58 ━

BA225 UNCLASSIFIED It was the opinion of Dr. Robertson that the "saucer" problem had been found to be different in nature from the detection and investigation of German V-1 and V-? guides missiles prior to their operational use in World War II. In this 1943-1944 intolligonce operation (CROSSBOW), there was excellent intelligence and by June 1944 there was material evidence of the existence of "hardware". obtained from crashed vehicles in Sweden. This evidence gave the investigating team a basis upon which to operate. The absence of any "hardwaro" resulting from unexplained U.F.0. sightings lends a "will- of- the wisp" nature to the ATIC problem. The results of their investi- gation, to date, strongly indicate that no evidence of hostile act or danger exists. Furthermore, the current reporting system would have little value in the case of detection of enemy attack by copven- tional aircraft or guided missiles; under such conditions "hardware" would be available almost at once. ARTIFACTS OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL ORIGIN It was interesting to note that none of the members of the Panel were loath to accept that this earth might be visited by extra- torrestrial intelligent beings of some sort, some day. What they did not find was any evidence that related the objects sighted to space travelers. Mr. , in his presentation, showed how he had elim inated each of the known and probable causes of sightings leaving him "extra-terrestrial" as the only one remaining in many cases. background as an aeronautical engineer and technical intelligence - 10 - NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 58 anard Dea UNCLASSIFIED

━ PAGE 59 ━

-SECRET UNG ASSFED officer (Project Officer, BLUEBOOK for 15 months) could not be slighted. However, the Panel could not accopt any of the cases cited by him because they were raw, unevaluated reports. Terrestrial explanations of the sightings wore suggested in some cases and in others the time of sighting was so short as to cause suspicion of visual impressions. It was noted by Dr. Goudsmit and others that extraterrestrial artifacts, if they did exist, are no cause for alarm; rather, they are in the realm of natural phenomena subject to scientific study, just as cosmic rays were at the time of their discovery 20 to 30 years ago. This was an attitude in which Dr. Robertson did not concur, as he felt that such artifacts would be of immediate and great concern not only to the U. S. but to all countries. (Nothing like a common threat to unite peoples!) Dr. Page noted that present astronomical knowledge of the solar system makes the existence of intelligent beings (as we know the torn) elsewhere than on the earth extremely unlikely, and the concentration of their attention by any controllable means confined to any one continent of the earth quite preposterous. TREMONTON, UTAH, SIGHTING This case was considered significant because of the excellent documentary evidence in the form of Kodachrome motion picture films (about 1600 frames). The Panel studied these films, the case history, ATIC's interpretation, and received a briefing by representatives of the USN Photo Interpretation Laboratory on their analysis of the film. This tear had expended (at Air Force request) approximately - 11 - UNCLASSIREDO NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 59

━ PAGE 60 ━

21032 1000 man-hours of profossional and sub-profossional time in the preparation of graph plots of individual frames of the film, show- ing apparent and relative motion of objects and variation in their light intensity. It was the opinion of the P.I.I. representatives that the objects sighted were not birds, balloons or aircraft, were "not reflections because there was no blinking while passing through 60° of arc" and were, therefore, "self-luminous". Plots of motion and variation in light intensity of the objects were dis- played. While the Panel Mombers were impressed by the evident enthusiasm, industry and extent of effort of the P.I.I. team, they could not accept the conclusions reached. Some of the reasons for this were as follows: a. A semi-spherical object can readily produce a reflection of sunlight without "blinking" through 60° of arc travel. b. Although no data was available on the "albedo" of birds or polyethylone balloons in bright sunlight, the apparent motions, sizes and brightnesses of the objects were considered strongly to suggest birds, particularly after the Panel viewed a short film showing high reflectivity of seagulls in bright sunlight. c. PoI.I, description of the objects sighted as "circular, bluish-white" in color would be expected in cases of specular reflections of sunlight from convex surfaces where the brilliance of the reflection would obscure other portions of the object. NASSAI Mothe 2202.12209 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 60

━ PAGE 61 ━

d. Objects in the Great Falls case were believed to have probably been aircraft, and the bright lights such reflections. •. There was no valid roason for the attempt to relate the objects in the Tremonton sighting to those in tho Great Falls sight- ing. This may have been due to misunderstanding in their ** directive. The objects in the Great Falls sighting are strongly suspected of being reflections of aircraft known to have been in the area. i The intensity chango in the Tremonton lights was too great for acceptance of the P.I.L. hypothesis that the apparent motion and changing intensity of the lights indicated extremely high speed in small orbital paths. §• Apparent lack of guidance of investigators by those familiar with U.F.O. reports and explanations. h. Analysis of light intensity of objects made from duplicate rather than original film. The original film was noted to have a much lighter background (affecting relative brightness of object) and the objects appeared much less bright. 1. Method of obtaining data of light intensity appeared faulty because of unsuitability of equipment and questionable assumptions in making averages of readings. j No data had been obtained on the sensitivity of Kodachrome film to light of various intensities using the same camera type at the same lens openings. m 13= NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 61

━ PAGE 62 ━

ECRET Then 41 UNCLASSIFED k. Hand "jitter" frequencies (obtainable from early part of Tremonton film) were not removed from the plots of the "single pass plots" at the end of the film. The Panel believed strongly that the data available on this sighting was sufficient for positive identification if furthor data is obtained by photographing polyethylene "pillow" balloons released near the site under similar weather conditions, checking bird flight and reflection characteristics with competent ornithologists and calculating apparent "G" forces acting upon objects from their apparent tracks. It was concluded that the results of such tests would prob- ably lead to creditable explanations of value in an educational or training program. However, the Panel noted that the cost in technical manpower effort required to follow up and explain every one of the thousand or more reports received through channels each year (1,900 in 1952) could not be justified. It was felt that there will always be sightings, for which complete data is lacking, that can only be explained with disproportionate effort and with a long time delay, if at all. The long delay in explaining a sighting tends to eliminate • any intelligence value. The educational or training program should have as a major purpose the elimination of popular feeling that every sighting, no matter how poor the data, must be explained in detail. Attention should be directed to the requirement among scientists that a new phenomena, to be accepted, must be completoly and convincingly documented. In other words, the burden of proof is on the sighters not the explainer. - 14 = NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 62 UNCLASSIERID

━ PAGE 63 ━

POTENTIAL, RELATED DANGERS The Panol Members were in agreement with opinion that, although evidence of any direct threat from these sightings was wholly lacking, related dangers might well exist resulting from: =. Misidentification of actual enemy artifacts by defense personnel. b. Overloading of emergency reporting channols with "false" information ("noise to signal ratio" analogy - Borkner). c. Subjectivity of public to mass hysteria and greater. vul- nerability to possible enemy psychological warfare. Although not the concern of CIA, the first two of these problems may seriously affect the Air Defense intelligence system, and should be studied by experts, possibly under ADC. If U.F.O. 's become dis-: credited in a reaction to the "flying saucer" scare, or if report- ing channels are saturated with false and poorly documented reports, our capability of detecting hostile activity will be reduced. • Di. Page noted that more competent screening or filtering of reported & sightings at or near the source is required, and that this can best be accomplished by an educational program. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS OF UNEXPLAINED SIGHTINGS The map prepared by ATIC showing geographic locations of officially reported unexplained sightings (1952 only) was examined by the Panel. This map showed clusters in certain strategic areas such as Los Alamos " This might be explained on the basis of 24-hour watchful guard and - 15- NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 63

━ PAGE 64 ━

ECReT awareness of security moasures near such locations. On the other hand, there had been no sightings in the vicinity of sensitive related AE establishments while there were occasionally multiple cases of unoxplained sightings in non-stratogic areas. Furthermore, there appeared to be no logical relationship to population centers. The Panel could find no ready explanation for these clusters. It was noted, however, that if terrestrial artifacts were to be observed It would be likely that they would be seen first near foreign areas rather than central U.S. INSTRUMENTATION TO OBTAIN DATA The Panel was of the opinion that the present ATIC program to place 100 inexpensive 35 mm. stereo cameras in the hands of various airport control tower operators would probably produce little valu- able data related to U.F.D.'s. However, it was recognized that such action would tend to allay public concern in the subject until an educational program had taken effect. It was believed that pro- curement of these cameras was partly the result of public pressure in July 1952. With the poor results of the year-long Project WINKLE program of 24-hours instrumentation watch (two frames of film showing nothing distinguishable), a widespread program of sky- watching would not be expected to yield much direct data of value. There was considerable discussion of a possible "sky patrol" by amateur astronomers and by wide-angle cameras (Page). Dr. Page and Dr. Robertson pointed out that at present a considerable fraction - 16= UNGLASSTZID NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 64

━ PAGE 65 ━

SORE of the sky is now and has been for many years-under surveillance every clear night in several meteor and aurora observing programs as well. as sky mapping programs at the various locations listed below. Although the attention of these astronomers is largoly directed toward identified rather than unidentified objects, no case of any striking unidentified object is known to Dr. Page or Dx L Such an object would most certainly be roported if found on patrol plates. A case was cited where an astronomer refused to interrupt his exposure in order to photograph an alleged sighting in a different part of the sky. This led Dr. to say that, if a program of watching could be an adjunct of planned astronomical programs, little cost would be involved and that the trained astronomical personnel might photograph a sighting of an unidentified object. The location of some of these programs and their directors are balieved to be: a. Harvard University, Cambridge and New Maxico (meteor patrol).-- Whipple. b. Jerkes Observatory, University of Chicago and Fort Davis, Texas (several programs) -Meinel (auroras), Kuiper (asteroids), Morgan (wide angle camera). co. University of Alaska, Fairbanks (aurorae) --Elvey d. Dominion Observatory, Ottawa (meteors) --Millman e. Palonar Observatory, California (sky nap) - Minkowski I. Lick Observatory, California (sky map) -Shane one, 17- NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 65 UNCLASS

━ PAGE 66 ━

INGLASSIFED It was agreed by the Panel that no government-sponsored program of optical nation-wide sky patrol is worthwhile at the present time, and that the encouragement of amateur astronomers to undertake such a program might have the adverse offect of over-omphasizing "flying saucer stories in the public mind. However, the issue of radar scope cameras for recording peculiar radar echoes would serve several pur poses, including the better understanding of radar interference as well as idontification of U.F.O. 's. RADAR PROBLEM OF MUTUAL INTERFERENCE This characteristic problem of radar operation wherein the pulse signal (of approximately the same frequency) from station A may be picked up on the screen of station B and show as a high-speed track or series of dots was recognized to have probably caused a number of U.F.O. reports. This problem was underlined by information received indicating ADC concern in solving this problem of signal identification • before service use of very high-speed aircraft or guided missiles (1955-1956). Dr. Berkner believed that one answer to this problem was the use of a "doppler filter" in the receiving circuit. Dr. suggested that the problem might be better solved by the use of a "controlled jitter" wherein the operator receiving "very fast tracks" (on the order of 1000- 10,000 m.p.h.) would operate a circuit which would alter slightly his station's pulse frequency rate. If the signal received on the screen had been caused by mutual interference with another station, the track would now show itself at a different distance - 18 - TH ASSED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 66

━ PAGE 67 ━

TRSLASSIRED from the center of the screen, if it still appeared at all. Dr. felt such a technical solution was simpler and would cost much less than a "doppler filter". UNEXPLAINED COSMIC RAY PHENOMENA Two reported cases were examinod: one at Palomar Mountain, California, in October 1949, when cosmic ray counters went "off scale for a few seconds", apparently while a "j" of flying saucers was observed visually; and two, a series of observations by the "Los Alamos Bird Watchers Association" from August 1950 to January 1951, when cosmic ray coincidence counters behaved queerly. Circuit diagrams and records were available for the latter, and Dr. was able quickly to point out that the recorded data were undoubtedly due to instrumental effects that would have been recognized as such by more experienced observers. The implication that radioactive effects were correlated with unidentified flying objects in these two cases was, therefore, rejected by the Panel: EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM The Panel's concept of a broad educational program integrating offorts of all concerned agencies was that it should have two major aims: training and "debunking". The training aim would result in proper recognition of unusually illuminated objects (e.g., balloons, aircraft reflections) as well as natural phenomena (meteors, fireballs, mirages, noctilucent clouds). Both visual and radar recognition are concerned. There would be many -19 - UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docid:34714841 Page 67

━ PAGE 68 ━

Cha UNGLASSIFIOD Levels in such education from enlisted personnel to command and research personnel. Relative emphasis and degree of explanation of different programs would correspond to the categories of duty (e.g., radar operators; pilots; control tower operators; Ground Observer Corps personnel; and orticers and enlisted men in other categories.) This training should result in a marked reduction in reports caused by misidentification and resultant confusion. The "debunking" aim would result in reduction in public interest in "Flying saucers" which today evokes a strong psychological reaction. This education could be accomplished by mass media such as television, motion pictures, and popular articles. Basis of such education would be actual case histories which had been puzzling at first but later explained. As in the case of conjuring tricks, there is much less stimulation if the "secret" is known. Such a program should tend to roduce the current gullibility of the public and consequently their susceptibility to clever hostile propaganda. The Panel noted that the general absence of Russian propaganda based on a subject with so many obvious possibilities for exploitation might indicate a possible Russian official policy. Members of the Panel had various suggestions related to the plan- ning of such an educational progran. It was felt strongly that psychologists familiar with mass psychology should advise on the nature and extent of the program. In this connection, Dr. Hadley Cantril (Princeton University) was suggested. Cantril authored "Invasion from - 20 - 24337 UNGLASSFIED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 68

━ PAGE 69 ━

SECRET UNGLASSIFIED Mars," (a study in the psychology of panic, written about the famous Orson Welles radio broadcast in 1938) and has since performed advanced laboratory studies in the field of perception. The names of Don Marquis (Univorsity of Michigan) and Ioe Rosten were mentioned as possibly suitable as copsultant psychologists. Also, someone familiar with mass communications techniques, perhaps an advertising expert, would be helpful, Arthur Godfrey was mentioned as possibly a valuable channel of communication reaching a mass audience of certain levels. Dr. Berkner suggested the U. S. Navy (ONR) Special Devices Centor, Sands Point, I. I., as a potentially valuable organization to assist in such an educational program. The teaching technignes used by this agency for aircraft identification during the past war was cited as an example of a similar educational task. The Jam Handy Co. which made World War II training films (motion picture and slide strips) was also suggested, as well as Walt Disney, Inc. animated cartoons. Dr. suggested that the anatour astronomers in the U. S. might be a potential source of enthusi astic talent "to spread the gospel". It was believed that business clubs, high schools, colleges, and television stations would all be pleased to cooperate in the showing of documentary type motion pictures if prepared in an interesting manner. The use of true cases showing first the "mystery" and then the "explanation" would be forceful. To plan and execute such a program, the Panel believed was no mean task. The current investigatory group at ATIC would, of necessity, have to be closely integrated for support with respect to not only the - 22- 1221807 UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 69

━ PAGE 70 ━

NW 90306 Docld: 34714841 Page 70 SLORET UNCLASSIFIED historical cases but the current ones. Recent cases are probably much more susceptible to explanation than older ones; first, because of ATIC's experience and, secondly, their knowledge of most plausible explanations. The Panel bolieved that somo expansion of the ATIC effort would certainly be required to support such a program. It was believed inappropriate to state exactly how large a Table of Organization would be required. Captain Ruppelt of ATIC unofficially proposed, for purposes of analyzing and evaluating reports: a. An analysts' panel of four officers b. Four officer investigators c. A briefing officer d. An ADC liaison officer •. A weather and balloon data officer I. An astronomical consultant 8. A group Leader, with administrative assistant, file clerks and stenographers. This proposal met with generally favorable comment. The Panel believed that, with ATIC's support, the educational program of "train- ing and debunking" outlined above might be required for a minimum of one and one-half to two years. At the end of this time, the dangers related to "flying saucers" should have been greatly reduced if not eliminated. Cooperation from other military services and agencies concerned (e-g-, Federal Civil Defense Administration) would be a necessity. In investigating significant cases (such as the Trementon, Utah, sighting), controlled experiments might be required. An example - 22 - A OFTE UNCLASSIFIED

━ PAGE 71 ━

F UNCLASSIFIED would be the photographing of "pillow balloons" at different distances under similar weather conditions at the site. The help of one or two psychologists and writers and a subcontractor to produce training films would bo necessary in addition. The Panel considered that AfIC's efforts, temporarily expanded as necessary, could bo most usoful in implementing any action taken as a result of its recommendations. Experience and records in ATIC would be of value In both the public educational and service training program envisaged. Dr. Robertson at least was of the opinion that after public gullibility lessened and the service organizations, such as ADC, had been trained to sift out the more readily explained spurious sightings, there would still be a role for a very modest-sized ATIC section to cope with the residuum of items of possible scientific intelligence value. This / section should concentrate on energetically following up (perhaps on the advice of qualified Air Force Scientific Advisory Board members) those cases which seemed to indicate the evidence of unconventional enemy artifacts. Reports of such artifacts would be expected to arise mainly from Western outposts in far closer proximity to the Iron Curtain than Lubbock, Texas! UNDEFICIAL, INVESTIGATING GROUPS The Panel took cognizance of the existence of such groups as the "Civilian Flying Saucer Investigators" (Los Angeles) and the "Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (Wisconsin)". It was believed that such organizations should be watched because of their potentially - 23 - NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 71 UNCLASSIFIED

━ PAGE 72 ━

ECHST UNCLASSIFIED great influence on mass thinking it widespread sightings should occur. The apparent irresponsibility and the possible use of such groups for subversive purposes should be kept in mind. INCREASE IN NUMBER OF SIGHTINGS The consensus of the Panel was, based upon the history of the subject, that the number of sightings could be reasonably expected to increase again this summer. 24 - NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 72 CRET UNCLASSIFIED

━ PAGE 73 ━

SECRET REPORT OF THE SCIENTIFIC PANEL ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS UNCLASSIFIED TAB A 1. Pursuant to the request , the undorsigned Panel of Scientific Consultants has met to evaluate any possible threat to national security posed by Unidentified Flying Objects ("Flying Saucers"), and to make recommendations thoreon. The Panel has recoived the evidence as presented by cognizant intelli gence agoncies, primarily the Air. Technical Intelligence Center, and has reviewed a solection of the best documented incidents: 2. As a result of its considerations, the Panel concludes: a. That the evidence presented on Unidentified Flying Objects shows no indication that these phenomena constitute a direct physical threat to national security. We firmly believe that there is no residuum of cases which indicates phenomena which are attributable to foreign artifacts capable of hostile acts, and that there is no evidence that the phenomena indicates a need for the revision of current scientific concepts. 3. The Panel further concludes: a, That the continued emphasis on the reporting of these phenomena does, in these parlous times, result in a threat to the orderly functioning of the protective organs of the body politic. We cite as examples the clogging of channels of communication by irrelevant reports, the dangor of being led by continued false alarms to ignore real UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 73

━ PAGE 74 ━

TAB-A UNCLASCHIEn •indications of hostile action, and the cultivation of a morbid national psychology in which skillful hostile propaganda could induce hysterical behavior and harmful distrust of duly constituted authority. * In order most offootivoly to strengthon the national facilitios for, the timely recognition and the appropriate handling of true indications of hostile action, and to minimize the concomitent dangers alluded to above, the Panel recommends: a. That the national security agencies take immediate steps to strip the Unidentified Flying Objects of the special status they have been given and the aura of mystery they have unfortunately acquired; b. That the national security agencies institute policies on intelligence, training, and public education designed to prepare the material defenses and the morale of the country to recognize most promptly and to react most effectively to true indications of hostile intent or action. We suggest that these aims may be achieved by an integrated program designed to reassure the public of the total lack of evidence of inimical forces behind the phenomena, to train personnel to recognize and reject false indications quickly and effectively, and to strengthen regular channels for the evaluation of and prompt reaction to true indications of hostile measures. /s/ H. P. Robertson, Chairman California Institute of Technology Is. Luis W. Alvarez University of California NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 74 2-622 s/ Lloyd V. Berkner Associated Universities, Inc. /s/ S. A. Goudsmit Brookhaven National Laboratories ls/ Thornton Page Johns Hopkins University UNCLASSIFIED

━ PAGE 75 ━

SURE UNCLASSIFIED TAB B SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL ON UNIDENTIRIED FLYING OBJECTS 14 - 17 January 1953 EVIDENCE PRESENTED Seventy-five case histories of sightings 1951 - 1952 (selected by ATIC as those best documented). 2i ATIC Status and Progress Reports of Project GRUDGE and Project BLUE BOOK (code names for ATIC study of subject). 3. Progress Reports of Project STORK contract work supporting ATIC). 4. Summary Report of Sightings at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico. 5. Report of USAF Research Center, Cambridge, Mass., Investigation of "Green Fireball" Phenomena (Project TWINKLE). 6. Outline of Investigation of U.F.0.'s Proposed by Kirtland Air Force Base (Project POUNCE) • 7• Motion Picture Films of sightings at Tremonton, Utah, 2 July 1952 and Great Falls, Montana, August 1950. 8. Summary Report of 89 selected cases of sightings of various categories (Formations, Blinking Lights, Hovering, etc.). 9. Draft of manuel: "How to Make a FLYOBRPT", prepared at ATIC. 10€ Chart Showing Plot of Geographic Location of Unexplained Sightings in the United States during 1952. 21. Chart Showing Balloon Launching Sites in the United States. 12. Charts Showing Selected Actual Balloon Flight Paths and Relation to Reported Sightings. 13. Charts Showing Frequency of Reports of Sightings, 1948 - 1952. 24. Charts Showing Categories of Explanations of Sightings. 15. Kodachrome Transparencies of Polyethylene Film Balloons in Bright Sunlight Showing High Reflectivity® UNCLASSIFIED NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 75

━ PAGE 76 ━

ECI TABB UNCLASSIFIED 16. Motion picture of seagulls in bright sunlight showing high reflectivity. 17. Intelligence Reports Relating to U.S.S.R. Interest in U. S. Sightings. 18. Samples of Official USAF Reporting Forms and Copies of Pertinent Air Forco, Army and Navy Orders Rolating to Subject 19. Sample Polyethylene "Pillow" Balloon (54 inches square). "Variations in Radar Coverago", JANP 101 (Manual illustrating unusual operating characteristics of Service radar). 21. Miscellaneous official letters and foreign intelligence reports dealing with subject. 22. Copies of popular published works dealing with subject (articles in periodicals, newspaper clippings and books). SECRET - UNCLASSITED NW 90306 Docld: 34714841 Page 76

━ PAGE 77 ━

REPORT CE THE SOIBNILEIC PANEL ON UNEDEVITE TED FLYING OBJECTS 17 Januazy 1953 1. The undersigned Panel of Scientific Consultants bas met at the request of the Goverment to evaluate any possible threat to national security posed by Unidentified Flying Objects (Tlying Saucers"), and to make recommendation. The Panel has received the evidence as presented by cognizent Governmental agencies, primarily the Undted States Air force, and has revieved a selection of the best documented ineidents. 2. As a result of its considerations, the Panel concludes: That the evidence presented on Unidentifled Flying Objects shows no indication that these phenomena constitute a direct physical threat to national security. We firnly belleve that there is no residuum of cases which indicates phenomena which are attaibutable to foreign artiraate capable os hostile acts, and that there is no evidence that the phenomens Indicate a need for the revision of current scientifie concepts. 3. In the light of this conclusion, the Panel recommenda: That the national security agencies take immediate steps to strip the Unidentified Flying Objects of the special status they have been given and the aura of nystery they have unfortunately acquired. We suggest that this ain may be achieved by an integrated program designed to reassure the public of the total lack of evidence of Inimical forces behind the phenomena. 1s/ Lloya V. Berknes Associated Universitles, Inc. (s/ 1.P. Robertson, Che irman California Institute of Technology A. Goudanit Brookhaven National Isborator 1es /o/ Luis N. Alverez University of California Chorntion Page John Ropkin University NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 77

━ PAGE 78 ━

. ON UO18 Честейни office of Compiled col Zubon, - chien •s 550. Scientist A. PERZODTCALS 2. Retura of Flying Saucers 2. Tradevinds: Report of e 020 in Exoter, X.I. 3. Trademando: Exeter People Give Accounte of Observations Thy 1 Bolteve in Flying Baucera Fatuus Senseu: inn arbor and Milksdate Digitings vying Saucers: 112ustons os Res.1077 12015 10 Nichi gau Gullibility Experiment: Soutteru California ARTO LOOK At 43VIDE ORDOCTOR RESCIOUS: 200 Anawers 9. Mazeb Cos in Michigan: latest UP0 ineident 10. Notes and Coment: Saucer 2 Lap 1L4 outer-Space Chort Story: Except from Incident at Exoter 12. Pl iu the Sky: U20's Michigan 18. Tradovinds: USAT De- actions to Recent Sightings 14. Noll-Witnessed Invauton by Sonething: Australia to bichigen D. Coben J.G. Pullet 1. 0L Fulles 1. Kantor 3.G. Puller 2.06 Tuller P. 0'801l BATTON Sep 13, 2085 Saturday Oct 73, 1060 Korter Saturdny Review dan 22, 1986 Popalar Belence Jan 2960 Line Apx-31 1,1900 U.S. News Apr 4, 2000 tine Aps 8, 1006 U.S. Neve Apx 13,3000 America Ap 0. 01000 New Усткогі Арг 9,1908 Look Bradora Digest Newsweek Tob 32,1000 5A5: 1060 Apr: 472066 Sat.Boviow Apr 16,2066 Lite Apx 1, 1900 DO NOT DESTROY - NW 90306 Doeld:34714841 Page 78

━ PAGE 79 ━

20. Should Ye De Serious About UFOlar Unidentified Flying Object 18. Urology: New, Report, debunke belief that UTO's are pursing the Earth 17. Norld of Tying Baucers 13. Saucors, Penoskes and Such 19- ACorDOOR vich sae opaco People 20- Tying Saucers 2л.- Дуе от брасо 00- Out-03-th0-32u0 Bel levens of Dew York 23- Saucers Explained 24. Baucery and flylaE Saucere 20. Saucers 20. What's Up There? 27. Cups or Saucers 23.- Dinner Time 89. Dr. Jung and the Baucers 305 Flyiag Saucors and Science I3 You're Seeing Tainge 10 too BSy 33. No Evidence for DauceTe Saucer Session for Spaceship Sighteras Interplanetary Spacecrat: Convention D. Cohen Setence Digest Suno, 1995 Newsweek ANg S, 1063 Jenael) detence h. Co Bozo Digest Вер, 1053 Selence М. Огарог Нагрох 8ob 26, 1863 Sep: 1060 C.C. Jung Sat-Boview Aug 6,1959 D.Q. Posin Pop-Nech. Tob. 1950 New Torior Apr 218,1950 Desence Ape: 80,1800 News Letter D. Cart Nation Nov.7, 1050 D. E. Robey Sat-Raviow Sep 5,1989 A.C. Clarike Boliday Tine March, 195% Sep 9, 1057 Time Now. 28,1907 Tino ANE 22,2038 Anor 10an Ju37: 2057 Hercuy U.S.Nows Now 25,3900 Setenes Nov 10÷1007 Here Lecter Lite Day 37,1952 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 79

━ PAGE 80 ━

i saucers and buosing So Seeing Things 06. 37- Sha22to fron the Sky S15a Chance tor Brucer Newswoek Noneveni Solence A0g+ 12, 3258 Nov. 13+ 1057 Tov - 25, 2051 Reb. 1800 35- lying Saucer Conspiracy D.B.Sehoe, An. Sop- 1956 30. 21ying Saucers, I've Soon Tlylag Cep. 1250 40. cos baucer Tovestigation di. Croat Saucer Tune Setence Di goet 8. Mandol Sat. Revien HAME Deb. 54957 3. Kobler Sat-Ive. Post 1000 1370: 2.955 Nar • 20, 1056 Taside Story of Saucero: 5.2. Ruppolt Escarpt from Rpt on UPO's Арг - 1030 Sodence Digent 46. In this the test Tools B. Koc1vsr June 14, 1055 Intest on the Tyins Onueer Bat. Revtow Reb 25, 3036 Sarisador AnondeRe Aus. 1060 you don/t 47. Basens 320s: Booke 46- Strange, Bhapos Been 1a the Shy 40: Unidentified Objeeks 13 to NoT 7: 2955 Doc. 5, 2996 Sty & Tol A. Lous Ang. 1030 Jan. 2904 BLATATIC Begian Study of Saucer Rapores Det. 10/ 1955 Aulation Tock So. NOw Lecter NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 80

━ PAGE 81 ━

Canade & Tlyinz Dauger Lookout Lab nor 120t0 Setenco Digest Yob: e1054 Salence Digest JADe 2000 Metatapt SS. Vatting tor che Dictie Mon Outer Sonce: Excepts She Letter dron Peris 500. Mom They no in Italy: Ascra? Tacrudero Of spoto defore the Eyes 00- on tae Plying Saucor Plenty Coing on ta the Skys Saucer Balloons dancers on Radart S- Thoge Plyine Saucore Dia. Kehoo Genot S-1- Ладог D. K. Nonze? C.G. VIlLe 65-20 Our Renders 1.- Stratsht S6. Tying Saucers and X-3. Crun Bost Solectton (BID31O) Cow Yorker Solence U.3- Neve ColLiers Solence Now Republic Ubrary 67. 47 US Saucero 8.5. Leo Another Sauor Ryetoxy Lot. Viacher TAyleg Aeration Week Time AL-BEZCUSY Get 250 70. Causo of Plylag, Saucers 71.2iylag Casson Kons 33. Tiring Deuces Toas ying Оли SpuEt V. Black R. Golett Pop - Set. Boy 20, 104 - ал 31, - 6S Арт . 154 Jam-1, 2060 Jun 22, 04 Арт - 2003 Jul Dac 11 068 Oct 25, 163 025. 1, 184 Tab. 435 Jun 23, '5s 5009 + 1201 Aus- 6, 58 ANg-9, -52 Oet. *52 Doc.6, *58 NAy: 1054 NW 30306 Docld:34714841 Page 81

━ PAGE 82 ━

74. 75. 78. Flying Saucers: Myth or Menace? Ple, Story Flying Saucers, New in Name Only Hollywood Butide Plyin Saucecs Coronet Nov. 1952 J.R. AsweL Readers July, 1904 Digest Popl Sct Nor. 1958 87- Nave me Vialtors 2on Space 73. Hor to Expose Flying N.B. Daszach Life At 7. 1352 2. CinnA Readeze July 1802 Digest Pop-3e1. Jan, 1963 R. Steiner Saucers: AY'S Project tor Photographing Them 79. Hot to Zly a Saueen 00 Hou to coo Flying Saucere K. Svetey 63. B6. 85• Vagicians Geoff at ying Saucers More about out there: Raviev of Is Another World Watchinst • Biddle of, tho Flying Sancere More Saucers over borth Korea 06.-Nov Saucor Spidemic 37. Now Theory of the Flyins Saucere 83. No Visitors from Space 00. CE. Spote before the Byou 90. - Noportes at Lergo 01. Saucer Reaction: Colitera Oct. 4, 1052 Pop-Sol, Sop-$1952 Newsweak Max. 3, 1052 1. Sheridan Tying: Nov, 1952 J. Malholland Pop-Sol. Sep- 1957 G. Heard T. Lay D.B. Denal D. 1A0g 1,8. 01ans Sat-Rov. Apr.28,1951 Lat Time Max. 3, 1952 Tow ANg- 18, 3903 Repablte Bel.Digest Sep. 2052 SCLE AL Selenco Ang 30,2052 Dec-19,2952 Let Tockor bite Sog. G, 1932 Just 9,1901 AuB, 13,105% NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 82

━ PAGE 83 ━

bRucerEt Selenco Saucers Klude C.C. Vylte Batronomers GeS 20L 90, Saucers Undes Glass Solentist Diagnoses L.Klovitt Pop-Boch. Some ching ta Che ALT 05, Temperature Inversions Cause Aging Saucons Poor those Flying Sateere 100. Washington's 811ps 201- Mhat vete the Flying Saucera 203. Vhas o Godag on -1a tho Sites ОS. того 1O LRO AуLRЕ SUCOTE LelL+E1000 106. Wisd 1a up 1n Runsas 105, Flying Saucer da Good Newt 200. Mying Saucers, Tact of Ziction Co Fuller 107• Bolatod. ExplanatIon on lying Saucers 108- Plylag Saucers feein 100. Tying Saucers; Ballooney not Baloney 140- noticene Sigh Altitude Dalloons Time Time 111 e Pop- Set. US News Av. took Readers Digest Xlying Time Sesence Digrot Deo 5+ 2052 J02 34, 1952 Aag 18, 1863 Sop- 1055 AuE: 21, 1052 Deo, 30, 1052 June 9, 1952 ANg. 4, 2952 ANg- 1295% ANE. 0, 1052 Ju39 204 1951 VULT 12800 July 1950 Sop 1950 10D 20, 1981 Scholastie Tob, 21, 11952 AV- Wook Teb. 1902 Мат - 3951 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 83

━ PAGE 84 ━

2100 Sacrong, nod CONS 07 Roll. Vood i. Took ulte 8.3. Vulting Contesp. Set. 21. Newsser 113-P3yiag Beacoas 216. Plying Saucer. Netery 115. lying Causers again 220- 2ying MeLton 127 - 118. 1x0. 120г 2240 221+ 223 г Co Pulles 3u a Saucor Cron Venues R. Golatt Raptor of Bolted che 14yi2g Saucere by 3. Scully Pies in too Sky 1e Moxteo Chiy Гарспозпо дукіде the Mytag Saucers Dancer-A700 Tuagons Thingn chao go this: Flying Saucers Visitors Cron yins Snocer Tem That Tea can Polteva 25m0 God. Di gost 70b. 12-1951 3aog 36,1500 July 1030 Хак 26, 2950 Sor 17402050 Jul 1950 500 2950 21, X830 2050 Sep 20, 3060 Ара 3, 2050 NAS + 1800 Арк 6: 1850 Nay. 0, 1940 Jaa. 0, 2860 C. Shalett 124. - 22ying Dimire Drosk out over the u.S. 125. Plying Dancer Spots Bazore Shots Lyon 120- PLying, Deucore: Cho Somethinge 227- Illustone of Satwe 335. Remember the Flying Saucers 109. Sosing to Decelvin: W.- Luch Lont Sut.Eve.Poet 30, 1019 May 7, 3049 J21 131+ 2011 Ju2 36, 3940 July 38, 2007 0et.: 2042 Set. Di goat Oct a 2947 June: 1086 NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 84

━ PAGE 85 ━

B.. BOOLS OUT RATCET 2.: Tho Taexplicable Sky 3. Opace, Gravity and the Trying Sauces Book Ept 1e 6. 11ging Saucow Deviou 6. Thoy Dodo in Space Ships lying Saucers and Connou Songe The Gave Too Cho:070, unidentified MAYANG COLOCTE 0. Too Flying, Cancer Conupiracy 10 Lying Saucers Pron Cuter, Space 24. Flyins Saucars: Top decrot 122 Tho WTO Facts and thour interpretation 13, Flying Saucoze 11. The World ot Flying Saucera: ох Сво брасо. Лдн 26. yins Saucern and the Stratent-Line Mystery Proach Translation) 16- Tho Truth about Z1yiag Saucero 17. Natioun tavostications Counteter. od tonial Phenomoon 10. Plying saucers and tho USA? 19. AnstoRy Un Spaco - A Selentille Appratee 10- Tying Saucere Docensorod КА. Тав U70 Аппик NW 90306 Docld:34714841 Page 86 1. Gordon Allen Arcour Comesance Leonard C. Camp Leon Davidson Into by dripeles do Poor trench (Citadel Pross) Cavia Gibbons Weventy Girvan Not desoug D. B. Soyboo D.3. D.E. Keyhoo Coral 1. Lorenzon D. B. Monael Alne Mlebel Aime Nichol Rio hard I. Tall; B010K awrence d. Tacker Jacques Valise The Citaded Prose