Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
November 4, 2016
Document Release Date: 
October 14, 1998
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
May 29, 1987
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP96-00789R002000330001-3.pdf638.82 KB
Approved For Release 2000/1 - 9 -00789 F~41QA4QPAqR90 -GOVERNMENT memorandum r DATE: REPLY TO ATTN OF: SG1A 29 May 1987 DT-S (Ops) SUN STREAK Utility Assessment Report Project 1. (S/SK/ INTEL) In response to a request for information concerning six separate SUN STREAK sources were tasked during the period 4 to 12 May 1987. 2. (S/SK/WNINTEL) The following is provided as raw, unevaluated information. These sources have provided reliable information in the past but the veracity of this data cannot be established by this office due to the lack of sufficient target background data. a. (S/SK/WNINTEL) Source #003 was interviewed twice and stated substantially as follows: During the first interview source reported that the site was a rocky, desert scrub type environment with gullies and hills. Structures were present which had an official, military, government feel (not further identified). An object was also present which may be mounted on something like shock absorbers. ` 1iect was connected with the cept of moving through the air meaning that the object itself does not necessaries move through the air). WARNING NOTICE: SENSITIVE INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND METHODS INVOLVED HANDLE VIA SKEET CHANNELS ONLY SPECIAL ACCESS REQUIRED CLASSIFIED BY: DIA-DT DECLASSIFY BY: OADR OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R00200033000,IMR(41CFR)105-11.8 ';F:r,RFT 6010-114 Approved For Release 200W$ AW16-00789R002000330001-3 Outside, during ursmof _d_a_rk,e,ss, a crew (not further identified) was adjusting, packing, preparing and loading the object. There were some lights shining on the object, but limited so as not to attract attention; he idea of ._. ht mask in g o~`"the -a'ct ivity- There wasa sense of urgency, a time window wherein activity may not be started po ,a given -..rime and must be terminated prior to a given time. The time available was severely limited. An event occurred during this time, during which most people were away from the object except for possibly one man. The event, which occurred sometime in the past (not further identified), entailed the object being run up and run down (not further identified). It performed and then was stopped. At another time, closer to the present, another event associated with this object took place. People observed this from a great distance, a if it were a fire p,gr_ demonstration. The event seemed tote an effects test the significance of which was partially the unusual distance involved. A target structure was involved and the object was connected with its destruction. During the test small puffs appeared around the target prior to an intense, bright, burning magnesium-like sparking which appeared to climb from the base of the structure to the top destroying it along the way, leaving only framework behind where solid was before. There was no visible path from the source object to the target structure. This unseen path did not seem to be line-of-sight. During this event the object itself rested on a flat place and there were no people around it. The actual effects that were delivered in this process involved waves and pushing and pulling ofR minute components, perhaps molecules, producing small bends. The aggregate effects, however, were extreme. The effect- causing phenomenon itself (from the object to the target) had some degree of directability but exactly how much and how accurate it might be, was not certain perhaps because this effect-causing phenomenon was not visible. The results of this particular test although not perfect and perhaps providing mixed results, made those present ecstatic for the fact that the test happened at all. During the second interview source reported that the effect-causing phenomenon, which was not visible during travel, arrived at (traveled to?) the target from a da,;re6tion almost parallel to the horizon. It followed a wiggly course to the target, like a lightning bolt. There was a sense of two components involved - a designator and a cause. The causal object was funny-shaped with various protrusions, angles, and substructures. It was supported on legs/outriggers/landing gear, as if it were spring loaded or bouncy. There was little internal empty space; wires, cables, circuits, electronic parts, guiding/controlling/ Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002000330001-3 P Approved For Release 20SE P!96-00789R002000330001-3 moving in a curving arc during-what appeared to be the hours of darkness. There was an event (not further identified) prior to this one. During the second interview source described an event which,, AJy_ed.__a brilliant white flash and pressureshock wave and rich occurred at, or.just above ground level. The target area was open and `similsr to _a-rocky, desert envi-roamoilt The event was similar to but not exactly like a typical explosion (not further identified). The perpetrators of this event felt relieved that it was not a failure, but also felt that it produced unexpected, unusual or confusing results (not further identified). After the formal interview source provided a attached sketch (TAB A) which does not necessarily reflect his impressions during the interview, but rather his own concept of the situation at hand. Source provided no further amplifying information which could be construed to concern the nature and scope of the project's potential for success, or the project's strengths and SG1A weaknesses. c. (S/SK/WNINTEL) Source #018 was interviewed twice and stated substantially as follows: During the first interview source reported that the site involved a (earthen) dome-shaped structure which blended in with the surrounding ground. There was an experiment or series of experi_l.ents which appear to have taken place within this structure. These experiments involved an object above the floor. During. one of the experiments a sudden pressure happened in the area between the object and the floor (not further described). The aside of the structure Teared dark during the'experiment except for an area a.rpund this object which was,_white_ and red and very bright. This experiment seemed to the first in a series of steps. This experimental step may have been attempted several times in the past but this time it was successful (not further explained). In the recent past, (or possibly near future), a test takes place in the open. In connection with this test there wt. a process of extrusion, a drawing or pulling up, as if soz thing was produced from a break or hole in a solid surfac? (not further identified). During the second interview source described an open area below ground withiin which there was a bluish corona-like light radiating from a source (not further identified) during a test. Ts test was eted -during the hours of,, +Lda-- ~, rkness !'..and occurred sometime in the p ~ past. A re Bated p9pping noise was associated with this event. At a later point in time there was another event. During this event Approved For Release 2000/SECR 08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002000330001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002000330001-3 there was a very small, possibly fractions of an inch, column of int_en.% fight. beneath the,&round which was accompanied by a loud cracking/popping sound and, again, the fuzzy bluish light spreading out into the open area around it. There was no sense of explosion in connection with this phenomenon. Above ground and centered over this area a very big (miles in diameter) frisbee-shaped, translucent, whitish cloud suddenly appeared and the sound of whump came from underground (see TAB B). Interviewer Note: Source felt he was perceiving an underground test but felt strongly that it was not a nuclear test. Source provided no further amplifying information which could be construed to concern the nature and scope of the project's potential for success, or the projec s streng s and weaknesses. d. (S/SK/WNINTEL) Source #021 was interviewed twice and provided the following information, much of which does not appear to be relevant to SG1A During both interviews source described an isolated barren area with a warm dry climate and low, flat structures. A major portion of one structure was underground. When asked to describe an occurrence during the period 15 april 1987 to 15 May 1987, source described=an-underground r es - king/explosion which resulted in_physical destruction r.d_frantic personnel activity. Source's first impression of the cause of this rumbling/explosion was that a mistake or miscalculation had been made. During the second interview, however, source's opinion was that the rumbling/explosion was the result of internal sabotage involving the release of pressure from a pipe. Source provided no further amplifying information which could be construed to concern the nature and scope of the project's potential for success, or the project's strengths and weaknesses. e. (S/SK/WNINTEL) Source #079 was interviewed twice and stated substantially as follows: During the first interview source described an isolated natural area with a circular area/structure which appeared to be both manmade and natural. This may have been a. nu.ral structure used by man, a hidden area, or perhaps a struc_ture that was not always occupied. This area/structure had a rim and was slanted. Sometimes there was a7shooting L......w.ithin this area which made the area hotter. Inside and underground in .his area/structure there were men who were SG1A SG1A Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002000330001-3 LC; K L. Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002000330001-3 moving about, walking, observing and overseeing (not further-' explained). There were two important underground areas. The first gave the impression of light coming from the floor. The second area was dark, deeper down under the area/structure. In an.area (unspecified by source) there was an object that was rotating and involved a moving backwards. This object fired,and then the firings vanished. This object could not hit high altitudes but could hit fast (not further explained). At some point in the future (not specified) this object looked better (not further explained) and was bigger. At this point in the future the object/device, now apparently outside, was working correctly in that it was straight, more precise, more refined, reaching out; it was able to emit out better, moved in a side-circular way and no longer backwards. It (?) was circular. It was still not hitting high altitudes but was able to reach out at further distances, more precise. The inner workings fit better. There were no problems. ADMIN NOTE: Much of the above information was volunteered by source without being specifically directed or questioned by the interviewer. Later in the interview, however, when directed to locate an object of interest at the site, source continued: Something moveable, spinning, part of it was shooting off, coming up and around. The shooting off did not go very high; it""was damaging at low levels, damaging up close. It did not have the power from far away but the movement was fast and made up for it-(not further explained). Source also described other characteristics of the object/device but it was not certain (to source) that this was the same device cited above (perhaps because the descriptions covered a period of time during which the object/device may have changed configuration). In this second series of descriptions the device/object was round, spinning, backwards, firing out, moving around, black, with a heavy interior. It had a moveable inner working that could spit out and make the boom (not further identified). It only fired low but it was fast. It was brought out in the open and it did not need a person for it could go (fire?) by itself. It did not go high, so it did not present a high (altitude?) threat but .he threat was intended. During the second interview source was directed to describe an occurrence (of special interest) at the site. Source began by saying that there were men who were sent out to borders or bordering posts. These men were here only during the day. There was an object, a very big object, placed in a green area, a different area from the brown rocky area (a possible reference to the structure/area described in the first interview). The object was tall, rather simple in design and had a component that was spinning which could be Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002000330001-3 SECRET Approved For Release 200~Li6-00789R002000330001-3 placed inside the object and taken out. Men left (this object?) the green area with things packed on there backs. A flying object hit the top of a structure (not further identified as to what structure, where). Men then moved closer to the structure. It was hot and melting and could have (may have) caught fire. The plans for the occurrence were not elaborate. The plans for the timing and the precision were correct. ADMIN NOTE: Again, much of the above information was volunteered by source without being specifically directed or questioned by the interviewer. Later in the interview, however, when asked to elaborate, source continued: The object in the green area moved sideways or changed direction. The middle part was spinning and the top part shot out. It operated because of its alignment; it shot in a straight line. What may have been another object (or an adjunct or closely related object) was described by source as moving fast and speeding across. It was a small object, not big, moveable, and was operated independently. It went out knowing where it was going before it left, followed a path and hit a structure. The area was circled first, watched to know what was there. The small object hit on time with precision; it was not a miss. It was perfect. The concept of shootin? out by one of the objects described by source was further clarified as, "From the green area, went right on path, no deviance from the system, line of sight only, line of sight followed, nothing went wrong." SG1A Source provided no further amplifying information which could be construed to concern the nature and scope of the project's potential for success, or the projec s streng s and weaknesses. f. (S/SK/WNINTEL) Source #101 was interviewed twice and stated substantially as follows: During the first interview source described a structure which looked like (shaped like?) a giant Christmas tree located in an open area. Somewhere else (not further identified) there was a weird' shaped (structure?). To the north (?) there was a large white dome and to the west (?) a large mirror or something that reflected back, reflected light back. Flashes of light come back; it was shiny, reflecting, circular. Back at the giant Christmas tree there was a depression like a crater,-a manmade crater, with aglow flat structure. This structure was long, low, with square corners and was hardened, reinforced, entirely functional and devoid of beauty, like an unpainted bunker. Approved For Release 20 t F!Jr196OO789ROO2OOO33OOO13 Approved For Release 2000/ &.AR'dP96!00789R002000330001-3 during the time period 27 April 1987 to 15 May 1987, source continued: Monitoring and a test of some sort which involved precision mechanical sounds, periodic checking by people in white coats with clipboards who were walking on what appeared to be big catwalks inside a large enclosed area. This area. seemed similar to the inside of an aircraft, carrier with intertwined lattice framework and stairs going from level to level. An area a long way down underground was important in some way (not further explained). The metal Christmas tree fell down. It broke in two, two thirds of the way up. The bottom part fell into itself and down. People were looking up and there was a roaring and flames before the collapse as if something hit it, but there was no explosion. It was as if a big hand drove it down or buckled it down. There was a lot of power here, potential energy here, a lot of tension, mechanical tension. There was a rapid chain of events like it began to buckle first then exploded. It looked almost like a grain silo in Iowa being blown apart. (Note: From this point on the source refers to this structure as the silo and not the Christmas tree.) The cause of all this has something to do with a thing on high mechanical legs, like tripod legs (not further identified). During the second interview the ,,-source was told that the concepts of monitoring and a test were of interest. The source stated that the area was reminiscent of the Lancaster/Barstow Californiarcdes_vrt. There-.was an ugly bunker like structured nsideaberm. This structure's primary component was underground. There was a crescent shape (array) of metallic (poles with) crosses interconnected (to one another) and (all) facing in (towards the curve of the crescent). At the end of the crescent was a hugh metallic coffee pot shaped structure. This structure had (something) to do with a tremendous amount of kinetic energy (see further description below) that was kept circulating (within the structure). There was testing and1, monitoring going on at this location. After a final check, men (in the area) moved out of the way. There was (an impression of) something spit into the sky which went up to apogee, curved toward orbit, and then was broken into two components by a bolt (see further description below) which may have come from the hugh coffee pot structure. This (incident/test) was a success. An individual in the bunker was able to control the perceived size of the success by manipulating the figures/statistics. The primary prospects for success for the coffee pot were long range. Pressure, however, may be exerted to emphasize the short range goals at the expense of the long range picture. There was the hint of subterfuge with one of the personnel here (not further identified). The coffee pot had something to do Approved For Release 200Q ? C -FQP96-00789R002000330001-3 Approved For Release 2000/08108._;._DIAiRDR96,00789R002000330001-3 with (the concept of) bracketing (as used in the targeting of artillery rounds) and it may be connected in some way with a platform in the sky (see further description below). The energy associated with the coffee pot was like a muscle at rest, like an object pushing up against another object causing a tremendous potential energy, coiled energy, greater than the sum of the parts, the energy increased geometrically as opposed to arithmetically. (Note: None of these descriptives should be taken literally. The source was obviously trying to explain a concept for which there were no appropriate words.) The energy was built up and stored in a way, recirculated, but the potential was always there. This energy was associated with the bottom portion of the coffee pot. The energy was kept circulating different than a storage battery; the energy was always there. There was a thick cool fluid and there was something that took the place of brushes (as in electric motor brushes). When things passed by the brushes there was energy but this thing (that took the place of the brushes) did it differently. When the energy flowed by there was more efficiency since the brushes had been replaced. The bottom part was cylindrical in a way; it fed into itself or built onto itself. Source was directed to describe the entire sequence of events again to include further descriptions of the image of the bolt. Source's description was essentially as follows: "It was like a light bolt, of light, like something hit this, maybe the coffee pot hits this; it is confusing." "Something starts to go into orbit, starting to go into the ,arc when it is hit (and) goes into pieces." "Something is climbing, curving; it meets something like a bolt." "(The) bolt is coming down from the sky, something in the air." "(The bolt) originates from something in the air, (something) that drifts." "The bolt comes down from above, higher up. "Something higher up hits it with the bolt." "The bolt is white, almost opaque, extremely rapid, directed, channeled." "I'm still confused." Source was again directed to perceive the entire sequence of events pertaining to this incident and to describe all thle components at the site in their relative spatial and functional location as pertained to the incident. Source's description of this incident then went essentially as follow: "(Within) the coffee pot (there is) a building up of energy." "(At) the ugly bunker (there) is monitoring, reporting, relaying information, watching (all of which form the) primary focus of the human activity (in the bunker)." "At the silo there is waiting, bouncing back and off (not further identified). Back at the coffee pot (there is) a Approved For Release 2000/a8/08 : .IA. R[FP9 -00789ROO2000330001-3 Approved For Release 200010i/98 :'`~lA- BP96-00789R002000330001-3 SG1H release of energy, climbing, climbing." "The bunker (is) monitoring, intersecting, almost aiming, digitalizing, computing, recording, checking. Over at the silo (there is) monitoring, reaching, kicking back out." "(At the bunker) men running around but like in a drill, no panic." "Whatever the-hell is going on it was successful in__a_ way that points the way to (the) future.".. "This is a step not a final conclusion." source was directed to address specific tasking questions. The following information was related: Potentials for success: A two path answer - long and short range. Given certain constants and licenses, chances for success and broadening or crossing over into other areas were very good. Immediate success was less important except as a stepping stone for the long range, although immediate success was also likely. The concept of success was modified up or down by the manipulation of data thus making success relative. One needed a correlation, a small success to compare it against. Strengths: Newness, its novelty, speed. It was difficult to detect, difficult to counter. It opened the way for many other areas. It was bulky and took time to prepare and to build energy. At this point reliability could only be assured with extraordinary preparation. Under routine conditions reliability decreases. It was costly. It required a large number of these coffee pots. Politically it was difficult to justify in a way for it was a concept whose benefit was a long way down the road. Interviewer Note: source became very confused during the interview and was unable to clearly and sequentially trace the various components utilized in this incident. Even with this "failure" the source was able to convey the impression of a high- tech test of some sort in which an overhead platform was involved in conjunction with a ground based system of tremendous energy output. The result was the interception of a fast moving object in orbital or sub-orbital flight. The test was a success and the potential for future successes was apparently great. Source provided no further amplifying information which could be Approved For Release 200 f08 -00789R002000330001-3 Approved For Release 2000-108108%401' ~R'I] 96-00789RO02000330001-3 . L- SG1A construed to concern the nature and scope of 0 M the project's potential for success, or the project s strengt s and weaknesses. 3. (S/SK/WNINTEL) The above SUN STREAK sources, although not in complete agreement,, seemed to have collectively described an incident (test) which involved several different locations or structures, one or more of which may have been in flight. The test involved energy or projected energy of some sort and resulted in the destruction of a target by unusual burning or a peculiar explosive effect. 4. (S/SK/WNINTEL) Direct access to raw transcript information is limited to personnel with SKEET access only. If access to this information is necessary, contact DT-S directly to arrange for an appointment to review appropriate transcript. SKEET transcripts are not releasable outside the confines of the SUN STREAK office. 5. (S/SK/WNINTEL) Enclosed herewith is an Intelligence Evaluation Sheet (IES) (TAB C). Please annotate one appropriately for each source (make necessary copies) and return the sheets to DT-S (Ops) within 30 days of receipt of this report. Care and diligence in annotating this IES will aid in the refinement of SUN STREAK assets and thereby enhance SUN STREAK's ability to p'rovide further information of intelligence value. 3 Enclosures TAB A & B Sketches TAB C IES Operations Officer SG1J Approved For Release 200Q/08108 : CI BP96-007898002000330001-3