Dean
Adept Dabbler
UAP: U.S. House of Representatives Intelligence Committee
advances mandate for all Intelligence Community components
to share data on "this mysterious threat to U.S. airspace and our military forces"
Yet another congressional committee has advanced language to mandate greater sharing of data on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena within the Executive Branch.
On Sept. 30, 2021, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the U.S. House of Representatives approved, on a voice vote, its version of an Intelligence Authorization Act (IAA) (H.R. 5412) for Fiscal Year 2022. It contains language on UAP similar (but not identical) to that proposed by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in its version of the bill (H.R. 2610) in early August, on which I have previously reported here. Neither the House nor Senate has yet taken up the committee-approved IAAs.
A press release issued by the House Intelligence panel said that the bill itself was approved by "a bipartisan voice vote." The release listed the UAP provision as among the "significant bipartisan Committee priorities" contained in H.R. 5412.
I will quote in full the committee's characterization of its UAP language:
Persistent Pursuit of Unexplained Aerial Phenomena. Following a bipartisan oversight hearing on Unexplained Aerial Phenomena, the bill is carrying a bicameral provision mandating intelligence sharing with the Department of Defense’s UAP task force. The provision will ensure that the task force will be able to fully draw on all classified reporting about UAPs as they continue to investigate this mysterious threat to U.S. airspace and our military forces.
The pertinent text of H.R. 5412 would mandate that "each element of the intelligence community with data relating to [UAP] makes such data available immediately to the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force, or successor entity, and to the [USAF] National Air and Space Intelligence Center." The Senate committee's version says "each element of the intelligence community and the Department of Defense..." (italics added for emphasis) Both the House and Senate IAA versions would require quarterly classified reports to the House and Senate armed services and intelligences committees.
This is the first time that the House Intelligence Committee has taken overt action on the UAP issue.
It should be noted that the House Intelligence Committee-approved language is substantially narrower and less ambitious than that already approved by the full House of Representatives on September 23 as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) (H.R. 4350), on which I have previously reported here. The Senate is expected to take up its own version of the NDAA (S. 2792), which currently contains no UAP language, before the end of the year. Differences in the two NDAA versions will then be negotiated.
While the NDAAs and IAAs are both important, the NDAAs may turn out to be the key bills to watch on this matter. The NDAA always becomes law (60 years running), while the IAA sometimes has a rougher time. Sometimes the IAA ends up hooked to the NDAA locomotive, sometimes not.
Bottom line: Many steps remain, and it remains unclear what UAP language will make it into law when this complicated four-bill process is completed. But, it is encouraging that multiple congressional panels are now openly backing enactment of explicit UAP-related mandates for the Executive Branch, and without apparent partisan divisions on the subject.
advances mandate for all Intelligence Community components
to share data on "this mysterious threat to U.S. airspace and our military forces"
Yet another congressional committee has advanced language to mandate greater sharing of data on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena within the Executive Branch.
On Sept. 30, 2021, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the U.S. House of Representatives approved, on a voice vote, its version of an Intelligence Authorization Act (IAA) (H.R. 5412) for Fiscal Year 2022. It contains language on UAP similar (but not identical) to that proposed by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in its version of the bill (H.R. 2610) in early August, on which I have previously reported here. Neither the House nor Senate has yet taken up the committee-approved IAAs.
A press release issued by the House Intelligence panel said that the bill itself was approved by "a bipartisan voice vote." The release listed the UAP provision as among the "significant bipartisan Committee priorities" contained in H.R. 5412.
I will quote in full the committee's characterization of its UAP language:
Persistent Pursuit of Unexplained Aerial Phenomena. Following a bipartisan oversight hearing on Unexplained Aerial Phenomena, the bill is carrying a bicameral provision mandating intelligence sharing with the Department of Defense’s UAP task force. The provision will ensure that the task force will be able to fully draw on all classified reporting about UAPs as they continue to investigate this mysterious threat to U.S. airspace and our military forces.
The pertinent text of H.R. 5412 would mandate that "each element of the intelligence community with data relating to [UAP] makes such data available immediately to the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force, or successor entity, and to the [USAF] National Air and Space Intelligence Center." The Senate committee's version says "each element of the intelligence community and the Department of Defense..." (italics added for emphasis) Both the House and Senate IAA versions would require quarterly classified reports to the House and Senate armed services and intelligences committees.
This is the first time that the House Intelligence Committee has taken overt action on the UAP issue.
It should be noted that the House Intelligence Committee-approved language is substantially narrower and less ambitious than that already approved by the full House of Representatives on September 23 as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) (H.R. 4350), on which I have previously reported here. The Senate is expected to take up its own version of the NDAA (S. 2792), which currently contains no UAP language, before the end of the year. Differences in the two NDAA versions will then be negotiated.
While the NDAAs and IAAs are both important, the NDAAs may turn out to be the key bills to watch on this matter. The NDAA always becomes law (60 years running), while the IAA sometimes has a rougher time. Sometimes the IAA ends up hooked to the NDAA locomotive, sometimes not.
Bottom line: Many steps remain, and it remains unclear what UAP language will make it into law when this complicated four-bill process is completed. But, it is encouraging that multiple congressional panels are now openly backing enactment of explicit UAP-related mandates for the Executive Branch, and without apparent partisan divisions on the subject.
Last edited: