Documents / Hearing transcript

Official hearing transcript PDF

U.S. House of Representatives · 54 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is the official transcript of a July 26, 2023 hearing held by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Accountability's Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs. The hearing was titled "Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Implications on National Security, Public Safety, and Government Transparency." Ryan Graves, David Grusch and retired Commander David Fravor testified. Members pressed for transparency and whistleblower protections, and Graves described a near miss involving a dark cube inside a clear sphere.

15
If we in fact have programs that possess this technology, it needs
to have oversight from those people that the citizens of this great
country elected in office to represent what is best for the United
States and best for the citizens.
I thank you for your time. Thank you very much.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Thank you very much. I know it was very dif-
ficult for all of you, all you have done in the past to try to illu-
minate this issue.
I call on myself first for some questions. I am going to start with
Mr. Graves.
Are your pilots, or pilots that you interact with as part of your
organization, do you feel are adequately trained and briefed on how
to handle encounters with UAPs?
Mr. GRAVES. No. Right now, military witnesses to UAP have lim-
ited options for reporting UAP. But more concerning is that the
commercial aviation sector has not adapted to the lessons that mili-
tary has implemented.
The military and Department of Defense has stated that UAP
represent a critical aviation safety risk. We have not seen that
same language being used in the commercial markets. They are not
acknowledging this risk.
Mr. GROTHMAN. OK. What steps do you think have to be taken
to improve a pilot’s UAP reporting, be it military or commercial?
Mr. GRAVES. Right now, we need a system where pilots can re-
port without fear of losing their jobs. There is a fear that the stig-
ma associated with this topic is going to lead to professional reper-
cussions either through management or perhaps through their
yearly physical check.
So, having a secure system, reducing the stigma, and making
this information available through the public is going to reduce the
concerns that aircrew have.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Could you just give me a little idea of the degree
to which reports in the past are not made public right now?
Mr. GRAVES. Well, I do not think there has been a proper report-
ing system to gather those reports and thus not report them. So,
to answer your question, I think there is a dearth of data due to
the fact that the reporting has been limited up to this time.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Could you tell me why you believe it is
—kind of to play the devil’s advocate, a reason why some of this
stuff should not be available to the public?
Mr. GRAVES. There is certainly some national security concerns
when we use our advanced sensors in our tactical jets to be able
to identify these objects.
However, there is no reason that the objects themselves would be
classified. I would be curious to see how the security classification
guideline actually spells out the different nuances of how this topic
is classified from the perspective of UAP, not national security.
Mr. GROTHMAN. I will give you a followup on that. Assuming that
there are reasons why not all it should be made public, this has
been around for a long period of time. Can you think of—can any
of the three of you think of any reason why anything related to
UAPs, say, 15 years and back should not be immediately made
public?

Cases discussed

About this file

Hearing transcript, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 54 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.