NORAD's $294,157 search fee

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

Contents 8
NORAD's $294,157 search fee
The Canadian-American NORAD North Radar System as agreed by the two nation in 1987. Source: " Challenge and Commitment - A Defence Policy for Canada…
The Canadian-American NORAD North Radar System as agreed by the two nation in 1987. Source: " Challenge and Commitment - A Defence Policy for Canada… Photo: Noclador · CC BY-SA 4.0 · via Wikimedia Commons
DateSeptember 1979
TestimonyShellenberger testimony, p. 89
Year1979 in UFO history
Timeline1979 on the UAP Timeline
Sources7

In the late 1970s civilian researchers asked the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) for its records of unidentified objects detected by its space tracking network. NORAD replied that it held no UFO records as such, and quoted a fee in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to compile the data, effectively ending the request.[1]

The denial

Illustration of official papers and files
Illustration: official papers and files. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.

In a letter of 11 August 1978, NORAD's Aerospace Defense Command told researcher Robert Todd that NORAD had no record of or relating to unidentified flying objects tracked by the Naval Space Surveillance System. It said the Freedom of Information Act covered only records that already existed, and that creating such a record would take about 340 hours of computer time and 400 man-hours. It added that about 25,000 observations reached NORAD's Space Defense Center each day, and that some 10 million uncorrelated observations had accumulated over twenty years.[1]

The fee

Illustration of an open book about flying saucers
Illustration: an open book about flying saucers. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.

On 28 September 1978 Colonel Robert N. Meredith wrote to Todd estimating the cost of compiling a record of the uncorrelated observations at $155,455. Todd could not afford it and dropped his request. The timeline's figure of $294,157 is reported in secondary accounts of the period, but we could not find the letter containing it.[1]

Context

Illustration of a disc-shaped craft in the night sky
Illustration: a disc-shaped craft in the night sky. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.

Around the same time Citizens Against UFO Secrecy and other researchers filed many requests with defence and intelligence agencies, and later sued the CIA and the National Security Agency. Agencies may charge for large searches, and researchers saw such estimates as a way of discouraging requests, while NORAD said its records were not kept in a form that made UFO searches easy.[1][2][3]

Later relevance

Illustration of a government hearing
Illustration: a government hearing. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.

The episode is part of a long history of researchers trying to obtain radar and tracking data, an issue that returned in the 2020s when Congress pushed for NORAD and other commands to share UAP data with the Pentagon's All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office.[3][4]

People and topics

Illustration of official papers and files
Illustration: official papers and files. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.

On the Timeline

Illustration of wreckage at a crash site
Illustration: wreckage at a crash site. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.
  • Del Rio crash claim (13 August 1979) — A retired airman says he learned of a 1950 crash near Del Rio, Texas.
  • Weitzel letter (1980) (July 1980) — Air Force counterintelligence officer Richard Doty delivers a forged letter to a civilian UAP group.

See every 1979 event on the UAP Timeline →

References

Further reading

  1. NORAD — Wikipedia · en.wikipedia.org · archived copy

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