On November 15, 1968, the University of Colorado's Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects became available to the National Academy of Sciences review panel after the university had completed the report and turned it over to the Air Force for review and later public release.123
The Department of Defense later said the report was released to the public in January 1969, so this entry treats November 15, 1968 as the documented publication handoff into formal scientific review rather than the later public-policy announcement.34
Origin
The report originated in the March 1966 USAF Scientific Advisory Board Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project Blue Book, chaired by Brian O'Brien, which found the Air Force program organized but lightly staffed and recommended university-based scientific teams for selected UFO sightings.5
The Air Force Office of Scientific Research then asked the University of Colorado to conduct an independent scientific investigation outside direct Air Force jurisdiction, with a public final report and an agreed National Academy of Sciences review after completion.6
The Colorado project began in October 1966, and its first AFOSR contract funded work from November 1, 1966 through January 31, 1968 under contract F44620-67-C-0035.167
Who
Edward U. Condon served as scientific director, Daniel S. Gillmor edited the final report, Thurston E. Manning signed the preface for the university, Stuart Cook and Franklin E. Roach were named principal investigators, and Robert J. Low served as project coordinator.16
The National Academy of Sciences review panel, chaired by Gerald M. Clemence, was appointed in late October and early November 1968 to assess the report's scope, methodology, and findings rather than to conduct a separate UFO investigation.3
The report also answered a live public dispute. In July 1968, J. Allen Hynek, James E. McDonald, Carl Sagan, Robert L. Hall, James A. Harder, Robert M. L. Baker, and other participants appeared in a House Science and Astronautics UFO symposium that pressed the scientific and congressional case for more serious study.8
What it said
Condon's central conclusion was that the previous 21 years of UFO study had not added to scientific knowledge, and that further extensive UFO study probably could not be justified on the expectation that science would advance from it.9
The report also said it found no evidence of a defense hazard, accepted the Air Force's non-threat position as a defense matter, and suggested that ordinary intelligence and surveillance operations could handle any necessary defense function without a special unit such as Project Blue Book.9
The National Academy review endorsed the report's scope and methodology while noting that some reports remained unexplained; it found no reason to attribute those cases to extraterrestrial visitation without much stronger evidence.3
Controversy
The controversy began before publication because congressional pressure, press attention, civilian UFO organizations, and scientific critics had already turned Blue Book's credibility into a public-policy issue by 1966-1968.728
The report's own history discussed the Robert J. Low memorandum dispute, saying critics used the August 9, 1966 memo to argue the project was predisposed toward a negative result, while Condon said he learned of the memo only 18 months later and that it did not guide the study.2
Hynek's symposium statement argued that some high-information reports still deserved scientific attention and that ridicule had damaged science-public relations, while Condon's summary said the symposium record did not require changing the report's conclusions.78
How evolved
The report moved from university completion into institutional validation when the National Academy panel began reading it on November 15, 1968, met on December 2, and concluded its deliberations on January 6, 1969.3
That review then became part of the official rationale for ending Project Blue Book. On December 17, 1969, Secretary of the Air Force Robert C. Seamans, Jr. announced Blue Book's termination, citing the Colorado report, the NAS review, earlier UFO studies, and Air Force investigative experience.4
The Air Force closure rationale repeated that investigated UFO reports showed no national-security threat, no technology beyond then-current science, and no evidence of extraterrestrial vehicles, while National Archives later preserved Blue Book as a declassified closed-record collection rather than an active reporting channel.410