Documents / FOIA release
This Federal Bureau of Investigation file section collects 1954 to 1961 correspondence and memoranda about flying saucers. Most of it concerns the Detroit Flying Saucer Club, which the Detroit office reported on from informants and chose not to investigate, while Bureau headquarters said saucer matters belonged to the Air Force. It also includes public letters to J. Edgar Hoover, a 1955 North Carolina sighting report, Leonard Stringfield's 1961 anonymous warning call, and policy reviews that restate the practice of referring reports to the Air Force.
“Socorro, New Mexico”7 pages
Read from the scan by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word.
By letter dated 9/17/63, advised he had been interviewed on that date by SA (Senior Resident Agent, Newport News, Virginia, assigned Norfolk Office, EOD 2/2/48, GS-13) regarding interest in reports of sightings of UFC According to stated he was contacting him in connection with his inquiries and that he intended to prepare "a memorandum for the files." requested a copy of SA memorandum. Prior to responding to the Norfolk Office advised as follows: was directed a voluminous amount of correspondence to military officials in the area and was employed by the Department of the Army, Fort Eustis, Virginia, the G-2 Section of the Second Army, Fort Meade, Maryland, was conducting a background check of The Norfolk Office was in receipt of several letters directed to other government agencies which were subsequently forwarded to the Norfolk Office. This included a letter to the Commanding Officer, Headquarters, Aircraft Fleet, Atlantic U. S. Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, 6/15/60; Commanding Officer, Cape Charles Air Force Station, Cape Charles, Virginia 8/7/58; Commander, U. S. Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, 8/8/63; postmarked Fort Eustis, Virginia, 7/23/63. was interviewed on 09/7/63 by SA in order to obtain background information concerning him in order to reply to the correspondence from the and the U. S. Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, mentioned above. At the conclusion of the interview, wanted to know what would be done about the information he furnished SA at which time he was told that the information he furnished would be made a matter of record in FBI files. was subsequently advised by in-absence letter of 9/27/63 that the confidential nature of our files would preclude complying with his request (the copy of 8 memorandum concerning his interview with It appears that the reference to the FBI on page 6 of manuscript is not completely true. However, it has the effect of leaving the wrong impression; the FBI was not investigating but was merely interviewing him in order to respond to inquiries directed to us from other agencies. SA did not interview merely for the purpose of writing "a memorandum for the files" but that his interview would be made a matter of record in FBI files. Also, the phraseology used by regarding SA reference to the confidential nature of FBI files could be misleading. These points should be brought to the attention of the Department of Defense. ## RECOMMENDATION: That manuscript on UFO be returned to the Department of Defense by our liaison representative with that agency at which time that agency can be informed that the FBI does not agree with portrayal of his interview by the FBI or his misrepresentation of the Bureau's role in investigating of UFO. However, the Department of Defense should not attribute these comments to the FBI and we are deferring to their judgments as to authorizing publication of the article.
FOIA release, from the fbi-vault collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. The text was read from the page images by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word. 148 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.