NRC FOIA-2017-0368 UFO records

. age 0p 2 f3
"::' ,.
-~~ Branch Evaluation, Plan & Recommendation •'
Allegation Number: RN-2010-A-0101 .t
~~ ,, '
Concern: 1. I ·.
"t -- ., "
; - . ~
*RX Code or Functional Area: Security
Responsible Branch: PSB 1 *DisciQiine: 1 Security
*OJ Investigation·Priority: . 01 Case Number: I 4-20XX-OXX
.,..01 Priority Basis:
Concem: (A concern is one or two sentences.)
Sometime between 1988 and 1989, an Unidentified Fiying Object (UFO) violated the protected area at
Cooper Nuclear Station and was not reported to the NRC as required .
Concem Background, Supporting Information, & Comments:
The Cl described an event that occurred during his employment as a security officer at Cooper Nuclear station. He
was employed there from 1986 through 1989 and did not remember specifically when during that time the event
occurred.
While posted at the intake structure o~e night, he observed an •unidentified flying object" fly down the Missouri
River about 150 feet in the air and hover in front of the intake. He observed it for a few moments and then
contacted a fellow security officer who also observed it (he could not recall the individual's name exactly but his first
name was l (b~{jand his last name was eitherl(b)(7)(C) 1). After they together observed the
UFO, it tume and went back up the river ana a1a not come DaCK mat sn1n. He and th~ other officer shared their
observation with their peers wbo did not believe them.
The next evening he again was posted at the intake and observed the UFO return again. This time he didn't call
anyone until the UFO had traversed into the protected area and hovered above the protected area just north of the
Reactor Building. He said It was roughly triangular in shape with a circle of rotating lights on the bottom. He could
not hear any propulsion noise from the UFO. He believes that it was roughly 1/3 the size of the Reactor Building.
Once the UFO hovered in the protected area, he called the securitv break room and most of the officers on shift
observed.the UFO. These individuals includedl(b)(7)(C) nd l(b)(7)(C) !(both of
whom were security officers), all of whom still WorK a1 me p1am 1ooay. tmer ••vvc.•n_•!:f mere for a TeW mlnU£eS, the .
UFO exited the protected are and returned back up the river to the north as it had the previous night The CJ said
that he never saw the UFO at the plant again after that evening.
The Cl believes that this incident should have been reported as a violation of the protected area space but was not
reported.
6123/10 UPDATE: The SRI at Cooper conducted a search of the corrective action program between 1/1/19~6-
12/31/1989 using the words: "ufo•, •ftyinga, "unidentifieda, •protected area•, and "hover". The search yielded no
entries associated with this concern.
Regulatory Requirement: (fdl in befuw)
No security violation. Possible rep_ortability_issue 10 CFR 73 Appendix G. l.(a}(3)(b}.
*Safety Significance: I I h iGH I J Norma1 I X INIA ~ .. ' ;.:]~ ·:
' .~·· '.::-~ .JJ
Basis: Describe the concern's safety significance (current, on going issue; level of individual(s} involved; etc.}.
Past event that has no impact of current safety or security of the station.
Check each question .as applicable to this concem.
X Is it a declaration, statement, or assertion of impropriety or inadequacy? Is there a potential deficiency?
X Is the impropriety or inadequacy associated wit.h NRC regulated activities or policy (e.g. SCWE)?
X Is the validity of the issue unknown?
If alf of the above statements are checked, the iseue is an .... ... i '·
-';:;; '. *Technical Staff Recommendation(s) l ~ .. -~F'.;."l
'
Date Recommended Action Assigned Branch Planned Date
06/24/10 SRI Interview listed personnel and return results to ARB PSB1/RPBC