Page:Robertson panel report.pdf/24

Approved For Release 2001/08/07-CIA0RDP81R00560R000100030027-0 historical cases but the current ones. Recent cases are probably much more susceptible to explanation than older ones; first, because of ATIC's experience and, secondly, their knowledge of most plausible explanations. The Panel believed that some expansion of the ATIC effort would certainly be required to support such a program. It was believed inappropriate to state exactly how large a table of Organization would be required. Captain Ruppelt of ATIC unofficially proposed, for purposes of analyzing and evaluating reports:

a. An analysts' panel of four officers

b. Four officer investigators

c. A briefing officer

d. An ADC liason officer

e. A weather 2nd balloon data officer

f. An astronomical consultant

g. A Group Leader, with administrative assistant, file clerks and stenographers.

This proposal met with generally favorable comment. The Panel believed that, with ATIC's support, the educational program of "training and debunking" outlined above might be required for a minimum of one and one-half to two years. At the end of this time, the dangers related to "flying saucers" should have been greatly reduced if not eliminated. Cooperation from other military services and agencies concerned (e.g., Federal Civil Defense Administration) would be a necessity. In investigating significant cases (such as the Tremonton, Utah, sighting), controlled experiments might be required. An example -24- Approved For Release 2001/08/07-CIA0RDP81R00560R000100030027-0