Congressional UAP Hearing - July 26, 2023

Overview

On July 26, 2023, the House Oversight Committee's Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs held a hearing titled "Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Implications on National Security, Public Safety, and Government Transparency." The hearing featured testimony from three witnesses with military and intelligence backgrounds.

The hearing marked the first time a former U.S. intelligence official testified under oath before Congress about alleged secret government programs related to UAP retrieval and reverse engineering.

The Witnesses

David Grusch

Background: Former intelligence officer with 14 years of service in the U.S. Air Force (rank of Major) and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (GS-15 civilian level). Served as his agency's co-lead on UAP analysis and reported to both the UAPTF and AARO. Filed a formal whistleblower complaint through PPD-19 with the Intelligence Community Inspector General.

Ryan Graves

Background: Former U.S. Navy F/A-18F pilot with over a decade of service, including two deployments in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Inherent Resolve. Founder and Executive Director of Americans for Safe Aerospace. First Chair of the AIAA Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Integration & Outreach Committee.

David Fravor

Background: Retired U.S. Navy Commander who served as Commanding Officer of Strike Fighter Squadron Forty-One (VFA-41), known as the "Black Aces." Graduate of the Navy's Top Gun fighter weapons school. Principal witness to the 2004 USS Nimitz "Tic Tac" encounter.

David Grusch's Testimony

Key Claims

Grusch testified under oath that he was informed of the following during his official duties:

  • The existence of a "multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering program"
  • That he was denied access to these programs despite his role investigating UAP
  • That the U.S. government possesses "non-human" craft
  • That recovery programs have existed since at least the 1930s (when asked about timeline)

Basis for Claims

Grusch emphasized that his testimony was based on:

  • Information from multiple "current and former military and intelligence community individuals"
  • "Compelling evidence in the form of photography, official documentation, and classified oral testimony"
  • Four years of corroborating evidence during his time with the UAP Task Force

Limitations

Grusch stated he could not publicly disclose:

  • The names of individuals with firsthand knowledge
  • Specific program names or locations
  • When alleged programs began or who authorized them

He indicated this classified information had been provided to appropriate oversight committees and the Inspector General.

Government Response

The Pentagon, through AARO, has stated it has found no verifiable evidence to support claims of secret UAP retrieval or reverse-engineering programs.

Ryan Graves' Testimony

Key Points

Graves testified about his personal experiences and broader concerns:

  • Personal Encounters: Beginning in 2014, his squadron detected unknown objects on radar after equipment upgrades, correlating tracks with infrared sensors and visual confirmation
  • Cube-in-Sphere Incident: Described a training mission in Warning Area W-72 where two F/A-18 Super Hornets were "split by a UAP" — a dark gray or black cube inside a clear sphere that came within 50 feet of the lead aircraft
  • Frequency: Encounters became so routine that UAP risk was discussed in regular preflight briefings

Three Critical Issues

Graves emphasized:

  1. Underreporting: "UAP are in our airspace, but they are grossly underreported" due to stigma and fear of professional consequences
  2. Aviation Safety: Objects operating in military and commercial airspace pose collision risks
  3. Excessive Classification: "Since 2021, all UAP videos are classified as secret or above"

Americans for Safe Aerospace

Graves testified that his organization had become "a haven for more than 30 UAP witnesses who were previously unspoken due to the absence of a safe intake process," with nearly 5,000 members.

David Fravor's Testimony

The 2004 Nimitz Encounter

Fravor provided detailed testimony about the November 14, 2004 incident:

  • Context: During training exercises off the coast of San Diego, the USS Princeton's Aegis radar system had been tracking anomalous objects for approximately two weeks
  • Visual Observation: At approximately 80 nautical miles west of San Diego, Fravor and his wingman observed a white "Tic Tac" shaped object approximately 40 feet long, with no wings, no visible propulsion, and no control surfaces
  • Behavior: The object appeared to be moving erratically over disturbed whitewater, then ascended rapidly when Fravor descended to investigate
  • Performance: The object reappeared approximately 60 miles away at their CAP point "in less than a minute" — traveling 60 miles in under 60 seconds

The Famous Video

Fravor explained that the widely circulated "FLIR1" or "Tic Tac" video was captured by another crew that launched after his flight, not by his aircraft. He noted that radar data showing jamming of the aircraft's APG-73 radar was not released with the video.

Assessment

Fravor testified: "I think what we experienced was... well beyond the material science and the capabilities that we had at the time, that we have currently, or that we're going to have in the next 10 to 20 years."

Congressional Response

The hearing was bipartisan, with both Republican and Democratic members expressing:

  • Concern about transparency and Congressional oversight
  • Interest in following up on classified briefings
  • Calls for improved reporting mechanisms
  • Demands for access to alleged programs if they exist

Representatives indicated they would pursue legislation to address UAP disclosure and protect whistleblowers.

Aftermath

The hearing contributed to:

  • Increased media coverage of UAP topics
  • Proposals for UAP-related legislation in the National Defense Authorization Act
  • Continued debate over government transparency
  • Additional closed-door briefings for committee members

Important Context

Observers should note:

  • Claims made by witnesses, while under oath, remain unverified by independent investigation
  • The Pentagon has disputed key claims, particularly regarding alleged retrieval programs
  • Much of the evidence cited by witnesses remains classified
  • The hearing represents witness testimony, not confirmed facts about the nature of UAP