Documents / Hearing transcript
This is the printed transcript of a July 26, 2023 hearing before the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability's Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs, chaired by Rep. Glenn Grothman. Ryan Graves, David Grusch and retired Navy Commander David Fravor testified on unidentified anomalous phenomena. Members pressed for transparency, whistleblower protection and better pilot reporting. Graves described a near mid-air collision with a dark cube inside a clear sphere off the Eastern Seaboard.
“Graves”27 pages
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?
Hearing transcript, from the hearings collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 54 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.