DOW-UAP-D077, AARO Unresolved Case Analysis Update: Western United States Event
This memorandum summarizes the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office’s (AARO) ongoing analysis of a reported incident near a sensitive national security site in the western United States involving unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) over a period of two days in 2023. As of June 2026, the case remains unresolved.
The summary above is sourced from the released file metadata as published to war.gov. The analysis sections below are original to this tracker.
Text of the document
Machine-extracted from the PDF war.gov published (its text layer or OCR), so expect errors, especially in names, numbers and handwriting; the PDF is the authoritative copy. Lines that did not extract as readable text are left out. Showing about 997 words from pages 1, 2, 3 of 4.
PAGE 1
OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR 5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) Case Analysis Update: Western U.S. Event “Orbs Launching 1. Executive Summary. This memorandum summarizes the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office’s (AARO) ongoing analysis of a reported incident near a sensitive national security site in the western United States involving unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) over a period of two days in October 2023. As of June 2026, the case remains unresolved. Over a period of two days in October 2023, six federal law enforcement special agents reported observing “orbs launching other orbs,” near a sensitive national security site in the western United States at approximately dusk. Each team of two agents reported observing phenomena with similar morphological features and performance characteristics from multiple viewing angles. The phenomena’s most distinctive reported feature was the repeating nature of their pattern of behavior, in which a luminous orange “mother orb” appeared to produce smaller red “orbs,” one after another, multiple times over a period of several hours. Reporters described the orange “mother orbs” as appearing for one to two seconds, releasing a cluster of two to four red “orbs,” and subsequently disappearing. The reporters characterized the behavior of the red “orbs” as anomalous, describing varied kinematic profiles including seemingly coordinated horizontal motion and apparent changes in altitude. The red “orbs” reportedly persisted for several seconds before disappearing, however, in at least one instance, the agents described a red “orb” as remaining stationary above a ridgeline for several hours. The reporters also described the phenomena as “silent.” The agents provided consistent accounts using similar language to characterize their experiences and the apparent behavior of both the red and orange “orbs.” 3. Analytic Factors. 1 AARO’s use of source-derived descriptive and evaluative language in this summary is intended to preserve the integrity of narrative testimony as provided by first-hand observers.
PAGE 2
a. The reporting agents did not collect video footage, photographic imagery, or other technical data during the incident. Human capacity for optical estimation regarding the distance, size, speed, and direction of travel of unreferenced phenomena in low-light conditions is constrained by intrinsic biological and perceptual limitations. As a standard analytic practice, AARO considers the influence of such limitations when assessing narrative descriptions of a phenomenon’s morphological and performance characteristics. In this case, AARO assesses that contextual factors supersede those limitations, and that the nature of the reported incident warrants further investigation. These factors include: i. The close alignment of the phenomena’s reported morphological features and kinematic profiles with those of other reported incidents in the western United States region. ii. AARO’s favorable assessment of the reporting agents’ contextual awareness of the operational environment and overall familiarity with U.S. military systems. iii. The high degree of consistency in the agents’ narrative descriptions of potentially anomalous features, as seen from multiple viewing angles. b. Due to a lack of instrument-measured distance data, AARO cannot determine whether the phenomena’s reported silence corresponds to an inherent characteristic or to acoustic c. The total number of orange “mother orbs” is unclear based upon the narrative reporting. As described, AARO finds two interpretations plausible: ii. Multiple orange “mother orbs” periodically “launching” smaller red “orbs.” 4. Current Case Disposition and Hypotheses. Approximately 40 percent of the reported phenomena lack a plausible explanation after first stage analysis and thus remain unresolved. To evaluate this incident, AARO cross- correlated the agents’ narrative accounts against commercial and military flight logs, radar data, spatial estimates, and Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) data. AARO considered several hypotheses to account for the currently unresolved component of the a. Misidentified Military Aircraft Exhaust (Ruled Out): The reported characteristics do not align with those of military aircraft exhaust. Though military aircraft were present in the airspace, their altitudes were too high for standard exhaust to appear as orange “orbs.” This hypothesis is also inconsistent with the agents’ characterization of the phenomena as “silent,” the reported loitering behavior, and the apparent “launching” of red “orbs.” b. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) (Unlikely): Agents reported that, in at least one case, red “orbs” persisted over a period of several hours. A loitering time of several hours
PAGE 3
exceeds the standard battery capacity and operational limits of typical military and commercially available multi-rotor UAV systems. c. Military Aircraft Dispensing Flares (Partially Plausible): i. Supporting Factors: Historical flight logs confirm that U.S. military aircraft operating in the area were equipped with, and actively deployed, infrared countermeasure flares as a component of a standard exercise. The reported morphology and behavior of these phenomena align with known characteristics of certain military infrared flares. The phenomena’s position relative to the observers, perceived direction of travel, and time of observation strongly align with historical radar and ADS-B data, suggesting that approximately 60 percent of the reported activity is plausibly attributable to military aircraft. The agents, who are professionally familiar with the visual characteristics of military flares, stated that the phenomena did not exhibit those characteristics. However, the visual and behavioral characteristics of the specific types of flares carried by the military aircraft operating in the area differ from those of standard illumination flares. ii. Contradictory Factors: For the remaining 40 percent of reported observations, radar and ADS-B data indicate that no known aircraft were active within the observers’ estimated line-of-sight from the ground. In at least one case, the agents’ report of a red “orb” remaining stationary for several hours is physically incompatible with the burn-time and descent rate of any known military flare. d. U.S. Capability Deconfliction (Blue Force) (Plausible, inconclusive): AARO conducted a comprehensive review of programs and activities across the Department of War and the Intelligence Community to ascertain whether the time, date, location, and reported features of the phenomena align with those of any U.S. developmental program, test event, or operational capability. AARO assesses that the characteristics described in the agents’ narrative account align with those of certain U.S. military technologies. However, historical records are inconclusive regarding whether those technologies were present at
Where this file fits in the PURSUE archive
This file is one of DoD's 257 files in the Trump PURSUE disclosure. Within the DoD agency block it ranks #138 of 257 by Anomalousness Index. Across the entire 450-file archive it ranks #262 of 450.
That places it in the lower-scoring band of the archive (262 of 450 by score), typical of investigative-record style files where the report is paper-based rather than instrumented.
Anomalousness Index: 56/100
Evidentiary weight that this encounter remains unexplained after conventional analysis. Not a probability of extraterrestrial origin - that number is not honestly computable from the released files and this tracker refuses to publish it.
🤖 AI-ASSISTED SCORING · methodology
The six rubric components break down for this file as follows. Each component has a weighted contribution to the final score; the per-component explanation below describes what this file's particular value on that component means in the rubric's framework.
No sensor, camera, or instrument backs this observation - it is testimony, relayed through the Department of War, and scored on the rubric's lowest sensor-quality tier for that reason. That doesn't bear on the witness's credibility (a separate axis); it reflects only that nothing beyond human perception recorded the event.
Reported by trained U.S. military personnel during an operational mission (2023) - a high witness-credibility tier, ranked in the rubric below astronaut, trained-aviator, and federal-agent testimony. This profile is shared across the AARO-submitted infrared-capture cluster that anchors the archive's densest scoring band, at 66.
On corroboration, this file from the Department of War - like every single-tier file in the PURSUE archive - is a single-witness or single-instrument capture per the released metadata. The rubric doesn't infer multi-witness confirmation the summaries don't actually establish; this score reflects the honest limit of what was released, not a judgment about the underlying event.
The released file contains no speed, acceleration, or vector data precise enough to score on the kinematic axis - and that's true archive-wide, not specific to this file. The rubric declines to infer kinematic anomaly from a witness's narrative estimate of how fast something moved; that itself says something about what PURSUE actually released: descriptive accounts, not flight-path telemetry.
Every file in the archive, including this one, scores this tier: a conventional explanation was considered in the released record but isn't treated as dispositive. That's a pattern in how war.gov's own summaries are written - they consistently hedge against strong conclusions either way - and the rubric takes that hedging at face value rather than resolving it for them.
This file was released as open by the Department of War after a formal review process concluded - not simply logged and left pending. That's a stronger disposition signal than 'unresolved, no review': a review actually happened, and remaining open is the Department of War's own published conclusion from it, not an absence of one.
Bottom line on the score: the Anomalousness Index of 56/100 reflects evidentiary weight that this specific file's encounter remains structurally unexplained by the rubric's six axes - it is not a claim that the underlying event involved anything non-conventional, and it is not comparable across rubrics that use different weights. For the full per-axis weights and the rubric JSON, see /methodology.
Related files in DoD
Other PURSUE files in the same category, ranked by Anomalousness Index.
DOW-UAP-PR024, Unresolved UAP Report, Middle East, 2023
DOW-UAP-PR072, "ADMINISTRATIVE REVISION: IIR 1777 J0032 22 Kazakhstan - UAP in the vicinit…
DOW-UAP-PR106, Unresolved UAP Report, Eastern United States, 2020
DOW-UAP-PR108, Unresolved UAP Report, Western United States, 2020
DOW-UAP-PR109, Unresolved UAP Report, Eastern United States, 2015
DOW-UAP-PR110, Unresolved UAP Report, Eastern United States, 2020
Verification
SHA-256:
This hash is the SHA-256 of the file body war.gov served on the verification date above. War.gov has re-processed some file bodies since first release (re-compression + OCR, no content removed - see /changes); we re-verify and record the change rather than silently serve a stale hash. How to check this yourself →