THE PENTAGON UAP STUDY 2023 By V.J. Ballester Olmos By now, it is well known that the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) is active in the UFO arena. It is also a notorious fact that in the last several years U.S. legislators have been very busy with regard to UFOs, now called UAP. I have reviewed and discussed the latest bills and the related legal developments in some recent articles. With the present paper, I am reviewing the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2023 by outlining several important new issues having to do with UAP research by the DoDs All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), in charge of the UAP study. I am not the first to comment on this bill and its effects upon the current official UFO study. Preeminently, it points out Douglas Johnsons excellent dissection of the UAP chapters itemized in the Defense law. NDAA FY 2023 The UAP Content The full NDAA is a 1,772-page document. The UAP clauses can be found in Section 1673 (pages 565 to 568 of Subtitle EOther Matters within Title XVI Space Activities, Strategic Programs, and Intelligence Matters) and in Sections 6802 and 6803 (pages 1,192 to 1,199 and 1,200 to 1,201, respectively, of Title LXVIIIOther Matters). The bill was signed by President Joe Biden on December 23, 2022, and was enacted on that date. Section 1673. UNIDENTIFIED ANOMALOUS PHENOMENA REPORTING PROCEDURES. Under heading (a) MECHANISM FOR AUTHORIZED REPORTING, paragraph (1) ESTABLISHMENT indicates that the head of the Office (AARO) on behalf of the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence shall establish a secure mechanism for authorized reporting of (A) Any event relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena; and (B) Any activity or program by a department or agency of the Federal Government or a contractor of such a department or agency relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena, including with respect to material retrieval, material analysis, reverse engineering, research and development, detection and tracking, developmental or operational testing, and security protections and enforcement. The aforementioned paragraph requires two major comments and one clear deduction. Firstly, the modification of the UAP acronym from unidentified aerial phenomena to unidentified anomalous phenomena. An innocent change? Not for me. If the own name of the object of study makes explicit that it is an anomaly, it is a priori understood to be something science cannot explain. In my view, the name change has been unnecessary (the hypothetical new classes of phenomena are more fiction than anything else), it is too emotional, and makes people imagine that all UAP are anomalous by definition. I will not attempt to squeeze blood out of it, however. For the time being, I will accept the soft notion, as expressed by astronomer and UFO researcher Brad Sparks: The A in UAP has been changed from Aerial to Anomalous in order to broaden the geomedia to be all inclusive without cumbersome addition of letters, so that Anomalous means aerial/airborne, transmedium, submerged and space objects. The U in UAP still remains Unidentified. Nonetheless, this change evidently has occurred due to the involvement of established ufologists and believers with strong predetermined biases, with direct access to Congresspersons and Senators. Do you question this? Do you think that those who have the ear of legislators are neutral? And everyone who can do so pressures with an aim in mind. For example, Christopher Mellon, former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, has pompously declared: President Biden just signed into law far-reaching legislation that could soon confirm the existence of an alien presence on earth. No more and no less! I find incredible that such a past authority in the field of Intelligence (who supposedly is well informed) dares to make these statements. Knowing as we do that interplanetary tourism (given the frequency of alleged visits) is prohibitive (Id say impossible), not to mention the absence of proper evidence, it is inconceivable to hold that fantasy...well, no, because it is only a belief supported by faith. But the worst thing of all is those individuals have the capacity to influence legislators. This matter is hardly an issue of common sense. And, yes, America is nowadays under the influence, like the celebrated film by John Cassavetes. Thats why other countries dismiss all the fuss. From a March 2023 column in The Debrief: Despite U.S. warnings, global allies appear unconcerned by the implications of adversarial airborne surveillance or unidentified aerial phenomena. Of course, the Defense Departments and Air Forces of many nations have, in the past, been following up the UFO question, to no avail. None is considering reexamining old subjects like these evanescent UFOsexcept the U.S.A., and mirroring Canada. My second principal remark has to do with the science-fiction-type narrative in the bills text where it mentions material retrieval and analysis, reverse engineering, etc. The opportunists carrying weight on law-drafting had a field day here with the inclusion of this. Having said that, we can expect that this will bring back everything done (or never done but rumored) through the UFO work performed by contractors like Bigelow Aerospace when paid by the DIAs AATIP Paragraphs (2) PROTECTION OF SYSTEMS, PROGRAMS, AND ACTIVITY, (3) ADMINISTRATION, and (4) SHARING OF INFORMATION (A) ensure that there are established and duly administered mechanisms to prevent compromising of classified information by the authorized reporting and that UAP reporting can be shared with the Office promptly. Curiously, subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) demands that if such authorized reporting relates to any program not ... explicitly ... reported to the congressional intelligence committees, it must be disclosed to the congressional leaders not later than 72 hours thereafter. Impressive! It is as if law scriptwriters suspect that any such restricted access activity ... or a compartmented access program is surely going to emerge from the occult shadows of the U.S. Government. Still, Independence Day stuffdid I say this already? Paragraph (5) INITIAL REPORT AND PUBLICATION mandates that AARO report such authorized reporting mechanism to a number of congressional committees not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and issue clear public guidance for how to securely access such mechanism. Heading (b) PROTECTION FOR INDIVIDUALS MAKING AUTHORIZED DISCLOSURES contains paragraphs (1) AUTHORIZED DISCLOSURES, (2) PROHIBITION OF REPRISALS, and (3) NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS. Procedures are specified for protecting individuals reporting UAP incidents and for due notification to Congress of any detected nondisclosure agreements. Everything related to protection of witnesses is important and I do applaud zero tolerance for censorship. But I have the impression that this is something obsessive and exaggerated. For decades, hundreds of civil aviators and Air Force and Navy pilots have spoken publicly about their UFO sightings. Are you aware of many ruined careers because of this reporting? Even one? Neither am I. In 75 years of UFO history, how many instances do you know of where someone has been castigated for claiming a UFO sighting, or bound by a legal constraint not to report? I perceive lots of paranoia among the legislators advisers. Believers and radical ufologists illusorily think that there are many extraordinary stories withheld by active or retired officers for fear of punishment, and that their stories are bona fide. What is the more likely scenario? Neither one thing nor the other. Heading (c) ANNUAL REPORTS contains a number of amendments to the prior 2022 NDAA. It is in paragraph (1) that we find the requirement that all instances of aerial be replaced with anomalous. For report recipients within the House and Senate, this item refines other terms, and better describes certain meanings. Heading (d) DEFINITIONS clarifies some of the 2022 NDAAs definitions. Paragraph (6) notes that the term Office refers to the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office established in Section 1683(a), and the term unidentified anomalous phenomena is formally established in paragraph (8). Page 565 of Section 1673. Section 6802. MODIFICATION OF REQUIREMENT FOR OFFICE TO ADDRESS UNIDENTIFIED ANOMALOUS PHENOMENA. This section has one large heading, (a) IN GENERAL, which amends certain items from Section 1683 of the NDAA for fiscal year 2022 (ESTABLISHMENT OF ALL- DOMAIN ANOMALY RESOLUTION OFFICE). It basically repeats and renews AAROs duties, capacities and reporting timelines. I maintain the merits and criticisms I outlined in previous papers. These are the main modifications introduced by the 2023 Act, followed by my Page 1192. (a) ESTABLISHMENT OF OFFICE. (3) REPORTING. (A) IN GENERAL. The Director of the Office shall report directly to the Deputy Secretary of Defense and the Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence. From now on, the Director of AARO is subordinated to an even higher echelon in the DoD ranks. It must be understood that AARO is not a study with start and end dates. It is an Office with a statuary foundation, and Congress may terminate it at Page 1195. (g) SCIENCE PLAN. (g) SCIENCE PLAN. The Director of the Office ... shall supervise the development and execution of a science plan to develop and test, as practicable, scientific theories to (1) account for characteristics and performance of unidentified anomalous phenomena that exceed the known state of the art in science and technology, including in the areas of propulsion, aerodynamic control, signatures, structures, materials, sensors, countermeasures, weapons, electronics, and power generation, and ... Here, it is demanded that AARO produce scientific theories for UAP incidents that exceed the known state of the art in science or technology. This mandate is profoundly inconsistent. Before producing anything, AARO must demonstrate that such knowledge is exceeded. A scientific plan cannot be built upon speculation. Unless AARO is miserably unable to explain certain sightings and proceeds to wrap them into a mantle of fictional properties, I predict that no such events will ever be listed. Truly, they will be able to provide the foundation for potential future investments to replicate or otherwise better understand any such advanced characteristics and performance, as paragraph (g) (2) continues, only when and if intruding, man-made flying vehicles from other countries have been detected violating U.S. airspace. In my opinion, future history books will signalize as a national shame how the United States of America decided in 2022 to study the flying saucers of the 1940s, the UFOs of the 1960s and the UAP of the 2000s based on the wrong assumption that we are being visited by spacecraft from beyond our solar system. Because if this assumption is false, no one will understand why the text of the law presupposes the existence of anomalous objects that are material, have propulsion power, fly under intelligent control with advanced sensors, generate countermeasures, and can be armed. What situation will America be in when they finally ascertain that UAP do not actually exist as anomalous objects, but are just a heterogeneous group of potentially attributed objects and phenomena? Pages 1195-1996. (j) Historical Record Report. (1) REPORT REQUIRED. (A) IN GENERAL.Not later than 540 days after the date of the enactment of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023, the Director of the Office shall submit to the congressional defense committees, the congressional intelligence committees, and congressional leadership a written report detailing the historical record of the United States Government relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena, including (i) the records and documents of the intelligence community; (ii) oral history interviews; (iii) open source analysis; (iv) interviews of current and former Government officials; (v) classified and unclassified national archives including any records any third party obtained pursuant to section 552 of title 5, United States Code [Section 552 is the Freedom of Information Act]; and (vi) such other relevant historical sources as the Director of the Office considers appropriate. Certainly for all UFO researchers (believers, sceptics, or mid-way), it is more than correct that the current law adds clear-cut provisions to help assure maximum transparency in the search for information from old epochs. In this regard, this part of the text appears fair. If AAROs efforts are comprehensive, it will review every program or study on flying saucers, UFOs, and UAP within the U.S. Government. For example (that we know of): departments like the Air Force, Navy, and Energy, agencies like the FBI, CIA, and DIA, consulting institutes like Battelle, contractors like Bigelow Aerospace, and specific programs like AAWSAP/AATIP and UAPTF. I look forward to reading what will certainly be a fascinating tome! Counting from December 23, 2022, 18 months beyond means this report will be ready by late June of 2024. To me, though, considering the magnitude of the task and the number of personnel required, the deadline seems too short. (B) OTHER REQUIREMENTS. The report submitted under paragraph (A) shall (i) focus on the period beginning on January 1, 1945, and ending on the date on which the Director of the Office completes activities under this subsection; and (ii) include a compilation and itemization of the key historical record on the involvement of the intelligence community with unidentified anomalous phenomena, including (I) any program or activity that was protected by restricted access that has not been explicitly and clearly reported to Congress; (II) successful or unsuccessful efforts to identify and track UAP, and (III) any efforts to obfuscate, manipulate public opinion, hide, or otherwise provide incorrect unclassified information about UAP or related activities. No doubt about it, this initiative comes from the lobbyists behind the UFO-prone legislators. They have an unambiguous agenda, which is based on their belief that there has been a dark hand in the successive U.S. Governments (both Democrat and Republican) since the 1940s, with continuing efforts to hide under the rug some extraordinary findings on, successively, flying saucers, UFOs, and UAP. I am persuaded that no systematic, recurrent protocol has ever existed. But in the minds of the ufologists and their partner legislators flow images of those Hollywood movies featuring a secret hangar housing for decades the Roswell alien ship. By the way, the request for a report of historical records of the U.S. Government back to the specific date of January 1, 1945, virtually proceeds from Jacques Vallees last book, Trinity, proof of the influence of ufologists and other UFO believers in the formulation of the 2023 NDAAs UAP content. At the end of the day, however, that is not so bad. By demanding that even the most extravagant circulating accounts are searched, when a reliable, independent and integral investigation is finally completed (with the expected nil result), the debate should be ended once and for all. It is more than probable that no instances of unlawful or improper conduct by the U.S. Government will be found in relation to its past UFO-related activities either. This opinion is also shared by James Carrion, former director of MUFON, the largest UFO organization in the world. It is based upon the ample investigation carried out in 1975-1976 by the Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, whose mandate was to investigate the extent, if any, to which illegal, improper, or unethical activities were engaged in by any agency of the Federal Government. Carrion advises those in the UFO believer community who believe this historical report will provide the long-[a]waited Disclosure the US Governments mea culpa confession to covering up proof of contact with non-human intelligence or physical proof in the form of recovered biological or physical evidence of non- human intelligence, to temper their expectations. I could not agree more. But I rush to add: with the sole exception of the profuse disinformation generated over the years by Richard Doty, former special agent of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI). We may have the opportunity to discover whether he did it by himself or was following instructions from superiors. The difference and implications are enormous. Pages 1196-1197. (k) Annual Reports. (1) REPORTS FROM DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND SECRETARY OF (A) REQUIREMENT. Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of the Intelligence Authorization Act [IAA] for Fiscal Year 2023, and annually thereafter for four years, the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense shall jointly submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on unidentified anomalous phenomena. The text of the bill continues with the abundant specifications for the annual reports already listed and commented upon in prior articles. With the IAA being integrated into the NDAA, its counter also starts from December 23, 2022, so there will be an annual report for 2022 available by late June of 2023. The well-informed reader is aware that the NDAA FY 2022 created a mandate for a report that was due by October 30, 2022. The report was actually released on January 12, 2023. Will there then be two annual reports for 2022? This requires some clarification: The cutoff date for cases covered in that report was August 30, 2022. The NDAA FY 2023 created a new mandate and a new timetable, with the next annual report due in late June, 2023. If they follow the precedent of the previous cycle, we might expect that annual report will include new cases that come into the system between September 1, 2022, and April 30, 2023. After that, each subsequent report would take in new information accumulated during the 12-month period from one cutoff period to the next, not calendar years.