◆ SpookStack

By letter dated 0/17/63 @Quagiee advised he had been interviewed on that date by BA (Senior Resident Agent, Newport News, Virginia, assigned Norfolk Office, EOD 2/2/48, GS-13) regarding QQ interest in reports of sightings af UFC According to (pga stated be was contacting him in connection with his inquiriés and that he intended to prepare "a rsemorandum for the files." Qa. - requested & copy of SA @iiggememorandum. Prior to responding to@REET the Norfolk Office advised as follows: @MMppoas directed a voluminous amount of corre- spondence to military officials in the area and as iim was employed by the Departm of the Army, Fort Eustis, Virginia, the G-2 Section of the Becond Army, Fort Meade, Séaryland, was conducting a background check of (IRM The Norfolk Office was in receipt td weveral letters directed to other government agencies which were wubsequently forwarded to the Norfolk Office, This inchided « letier to the Commandin Olficer, Headquarters, Aircraft Fleet, Atlantic U, 8, Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, * @/18/60; Commanding Officer, Cape Charles Air Force Elation, Cape cuarlee, Virgini thot Commander, 0. 8. Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, 6/6/63 ee meee eee, postmarked Fort Eustis, Virginia, 9/23/63. — Bidiewas interviewed on 0/1/63 by SA Qual in order to obtain back- ound information concerning him in order to reply to the correspondence from the : and the U, 6, Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, mentioned above, At the conclugion of the interview Bewanted to know what would be done - @bout the information he furnished SA wat which time he was told that the iefor- mation he furnished would be made a matter of record in FHI files, @MBwas subsequently advised by in-absence letter of 9/27/68 that the confidential nature of our files would preclude wine with his request (the copy of & 4 memorandum concerning his interview with . Ht appears that the reference to the FBI on page 8 of manuscript > Gs not completely true. However, it has the effect of leaving the wrong impression; the ¥BI was not investigating Sedat was merely interviewing him ip order to yespond - to inguiries directed to us from other agencies. SAQ@RR. did not intervie - “wnerely for the purpose of writing "a memorandum for the {iles™ but that his interview would be made a matter of record in FBI files. Also, the phraseology used by eregarding GA reference to the confidential nature of FEI files could . Be misleading. These points should be brought to the atiention of the Department of Delense, RECOMMENDATION: tree nanuscript on UFO be returned to the Department ot Defense by our *Naison representative with that agency at which time that agency can be informe that the FRI does pot agree with‘ portrayal of his interview by the FEI or his misrepreseniation of the Bureau's roie in investigating of UFO. However, the Depart- sent of Defense should not attribute these comments to the FRI and we are def to their judgments as to authorizing publication of wi article, ie