NRO "no UFO records" reply (2015)

From the UAP Encyclopedia, the open encyclopedia of UFO and UAP history · 🗓️ Event

Contents 8
NRO "no UFO records" reply (2015)
Assembly of a KH-9 Hexagon reconnaissance satellite, one of the NRO's Cold War spy satellites. In 2015 the NRO said UFOs were outside its responsibilities.
Assembly of a KH-9 Hexagon reconnaissance satellite, one of the NRO's Cold War spy satellites. In 2015 the NRO said UFOs were outside its responsibilities. Photo: National Reconnaissance Office · Public domain · via Wikimedia Commons
Request4 November 2015, John Greenewald Jr. (The Black Vault)
Reply5 November 2015, NRO Information Review and Release Group (case F16-0010)
AnswerTopic "outside of the scope of NRO responsibilities"; past searches "located no records"; request closed
Later casesF-2020-00092 (one SECRET UAP document, released in part 2022); F-2021-00164 (Director's UAP emails); NRO–UAPTF emails (released 2024)
Date5 November 2015
TopicsBeings & bodies (topic), Government programs (topic), Congress & law (topic)
PeopleJohn Greenewald
TestimonyShellenberger testimony, p. 182
Year2015 in UFO history
Timeline2015 on the UAP Timeline
Sources7

On 4 November 2015 the researcher John Greenewald Jr. of The Black Vault asked the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), the agency that builds and operates U.S. spy satellites, for its records on UFOs. The NRO answered the next day. It said the subject was "outside of the scope of NRO responsibilities", that it had "conducted numerous searches relating to UFOs in the past, and has located no records", and that for these two reasons it was closing the request.[2] Later Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) releases showed that by 2020–21 the NRO held at least one classified UAP document and had contributed to the UAP Task Force's report to Congress.[1][3][6]

The 2015 reply

  • The letter, dated 5 November 2015, came from the chief of the NRO's Information Review and Release Group in Chantilly, Virginia. It acknowledged a request for "records, electronic or otherwise, pertaining to the Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) phenomenon".[2]
  • It described the NRO as "a joint organization engaged in the research and development, acquisition, launch and operation of overhead reconnaissance systems" for the intelligence community and the Defense Department. It then gave its two reasons for closing the case: the topic was outside its responsibilities, and earlier searches had found nothing. The request was logged as F16-0010.[2][4]
  • Greenewald later noted that the case had been processed "in only one day". In his reading, the NRO had said that "after repeated searches throughout numerous cases, they would not even look anymore".[1]

The 2020 request

  • On 3 July 2020, after UAP had become an official subject of government interest, Greenewald filed a new request (F-2020-00092). It asked for all NRO records on "unidentified flying objects" or "unidentified aerial phenomena", including any guidelines or procedures for reporting them.[1][3]
  • On 23 June 2022, nearly two years later, the NRO said it had found one responsive document and withheld it in full. It cited exemption (b)(1) for classified intelligence activities, sources and methods and system vulnerabilities, and (b)(3) for a statute protecting NRO personnel details. Greenewald appealed the same day.[1]
  • After the appeal was granted, the NRO released the document in October 2022. It was six pages long and appeared to be a PowerPoint printout. The title slide's header began "(S//NF)", meaning SECRET and not releasable to foreign nationals, and included "UAP", but the rest of the header was redacted. A date on the slide may have been part of a date range. The next two slides were blacked out entirely.[3]
  • Greenewald noted that the search probably stopped at July 2020, and filed further requests for later records.[3]

The NRO and the UAP Task Force

  • A separate request for the NRO Director's emails, Christopher Scolese's (F-2021-00164), produced a TOP SECRET email of 9 June 2021 titled "Status of actions regarding UAPs". It was written by Thomas B. Bowman, the NRO's point of contact for the UAP Task Force.[6]
  • The email said the NRO's contribution to the 17-page classified UAP report amounted to four paragraphs, which the agency had signed off. It also showed that the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency supplied imagery and signals intelligence to the effort.[6]
  • According to the same email, the Defense Department Inspector General had interviewed several officers from the NRO's Mission Integration Directorate for its evaluation of the department's handling of UAP, begun in May 2021. A "data call" to the NRO was expected about two weeks later.[6]
  • A further request, filed on 27 June 2021 for NRO–Task Force communications, was answered on 29 February 2024. The NRO had found 17 documents: one was withheld in full and 16 were released heavily redacted. They included discussions of the draft "180 Day Report on UAP", an April 2021 email referring to a named NRO effort to support the Task Force, and a May 2021 reference to a "UAPTF Training Video".[7]

Significance

  • The anonymous UAP timeline in the journalist Michael Shellenberger's November 2024 written testimony to the House Oversight Committee argues that the 2015 answer is contradicted by NRO emails released in 2022. Those emails show extensive coordination with the Task Force and an NRO contribution "tied to its collection efforts". The timeline infers that UAP were being detected by NRO platforms, so the 2015 reply may not have been accurate.[5]
  • Whether the 2015 answer was accurate at the time, reflected a narrow search, or was overtaken by the growth of official UAP work after 2017 is not clear from the documents.[1][6]
  • The documents released since 2020 date from 2020–21 and later. None shows what, if anything, the NRO held on UFOs in 2015.[3][7]

People and topics

On the Timeline

See every 2015 event on the UAP Timeline →

Further reading

References

This page was last edited on 29 October 2026. Articles are written in our own words from the sources listed under References; disputed claims are attributed to the people who made them.

Discuss the article: missing sources, mistakes, or what should be added.

No discussion yet.

BrowseFeedArticlesTimelineOfficial filesMapTonight’s SkyStatsFavorites