Intern Avis For NUFOC - 1977 no 10

Magazine Overview

This document is an internal newsletter from Norsk UFO Center (NUFOC), dated December 22, 1977. It is designated as "INTERN avis for NUFOC" and is the first issue of volume 1, dated ARG 1. The cover features various illustrations of unidentified flying objects and a logo for NUFOC. The newsletter's primary purpose is to communicate internal organizational matters and procedures to its members.

Organizational and Reporting Review

The main article, "OMFATTENDE GRANSKING AV NUFOC'S RUTINER" (Comprehensive Review of NUFOC's Routines), details a critical examination of the organization's procedures during 1977. The author notes that 1977 was a quiet year for UFO sightings, but a recent surge in reports, possibly linked to the "landing at Hønefoss" incident (mentioned in internal avis nr. 9), has led to an overwhelming number of tasks. The review was prompted by the need to address the organization's preparedness and efficiency, especially in light of the public's and authorities' reactions to UFO cases. The article highlights confusion among police and military, and a lack of proactive response from some laboratories and the media (NRK Dagsrevyen).

The review focused on three main areas:

1. Rapportsentralen (Report Center): This involved comparing Norwegian press clippings from 1977 with report forms to assess how thoroughly reports were followed up. It also checked if rapporteurs (informants) were submitting the required clippings and how cases from Northern Norway were handled and reported in "Rapportnytt".
2. Skandinavisk Seksjon (Scandinavian Section): This section examined the flow of Scandinavian UFO material between the Scandinavian Section and the Report Center.
3. Sentraladministrasjonen (Central Administration): This assessed the extent to which the Central Administration oversaw the previously mentioned areas.

The results of the investigation were described as "not particularly gratifying." Key findings included:

• Rapportører (Rapporteurs): A significant number of press clippings (76 in total by November 12, 1977) were found without corresponding report forms. Many rapporteurs had not submitted the expected clippings, and the follow-up of cases from Northern Norway was severely lacking. The system of rapporteurs was deemed to have performed poorly, with a considerable delay in processing information.
• Skandinavisk Seksjon: There was a failure in the routine follow-up of cases from Northern Norway, meaning "Rapportnytt" did not receive material from Sweden, Denmark, and Finland as intended. This was attributed to a breakdown in the routine, though one individual, Lidstrøm, reportedly compensated for this.
• Sentraladministrasjonen: The Central Administration was found to have failed in not taking earlier measures to uncover these weaknesses.

Despite the negative findings, the article emphasizes that the intention is not to expose or criticize harshly, but to identify weaknesses and implement improvements. The authors acknowledge the workload and pressure on those involved. For 1978, a comprehensive journal system is planned for the Central Administration to register and track every press clipping, which is expected to improve control over this important area.

The newsletter also lists a substantial number of Norwegian press clippings from January to October 1977 that were found at the SA (Sentraladministrasjonen), noting in most cases that the corresponding report form was missing. This list spans several pages and details the newspaper, date, location, and a brief description of the reported incident, often concluding with "Rapportskjema finnes ikke" (Report form does not exist).

Other Information

• Contact Information: The newsletter provides an address list for various NUFOC departments, including the Central Administration, regional sections (Vestlandet, Østlandet, Sørlandet), and specialized sections like the Emergency Section (Moss and Tønsberg) and the Research Section (Drammen).
• New Telephone Number: The Emergency Section in Moss now has a new telephone number: 032-27778, to improve response times.
• Publications: NUFOC publishes two periodicals: "UFO Forum" and "Rapportnytt," both of which are issued five times a year. The subscription price for each is Kr. 30,- per year.
• Membership Fees: For 1978, the establishment fee is Kr. 25,-, and the affiliation fee, including the internal newsletter, is Kr. 45,- per year. The internal newsletter is sent to members after the affiliation fee is paid.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme is the critical self-assessment of NUFOC's operational efficiency, particularly its reporting and information-gathering mechanisms. The editorial stance appears to be one of constructive criticism, aiming to identify and rectify systemic flaws to improve the organization's effectiveness in handling UFO-related information. There is a clear emphasis on the need for better organization and systematic procedures, especially in light of an anticipated increase in UFO activity and public interest.

This issue of NUFOC VEST, dated 1977, focuses on an internal review of the organization's UFO reporting procedures and effectiveness. The publication aims to answer two key questions: the significance of individual UFO clips and the extent to which NUFOC representatives were present at reported incidents.

Analysis of Reported UFO Cases (January-March 1977)

The magazine presents a detailed breakdown of UFO clips from January, February, and March 1977. Each clip is categorized by its level of interest (e.g., 'Interessant', 'Meget interessant', 'Irrelevant') and whether a NUFOC representative was present or involved. For instance, January includes entries like 'Interessant/Ingen repr.' (Interesting/No representative) and 'Meget interessant/Ingen repr. Lidstrøm/SA' (Very interesting/No representative Lidstrøm/SA). February lists cases such as 'Mulig interessant/SA (29.1.77)' (Possibly interesting/SA) and 'Interessant/Ingen repr. Rapportsentralen' (Interesting/No representative Reporting Center). March entries include 'Lite interessant/Repr. Ålesund' (Slightly interesting/Representative Ålesund) and 'Interessant/Repr. (NB.Foto)' (Interesting/Representative (NB.Photo)).

Evaluation of Reporting and Follow-Up

Following the data presentation, the magazine critically evaluates the findings. It notes that after removing irrelevant and less interesting cases, a significant number of cases remain that were deemed interesting but were not adequately followed up. This is highlighted despite the presence of NUFOC personnel in some locations or nearby. Specific areas mentioned as lacking follow-up include Bergen and the Trøndelag counties.

The publication identifies potential reasons for this lapse, suggesting that either clips were overlooked or received too late for proper follow-up. It acknowledges that many representatives may be unreliable, but focuses on the systemic issues within SA, department leaders, and the Reporting Center.

Proposed Solutions and Future Plans

The magazine outlines proposed solutions to address the identified weaknesses. It emphasizes the need for a complete and adequate journal system for all incoming clips, starting from 1978. The goal is to study and monitor every clip from across the country, including disseminating information outwards.

It is suggested that the Reporting Center should play a more active role in monitoring the situation for departments and SA. The idea of departments becoming their own reporting centers is also mentioned, as proposed at a national meeting in 1977.

For the future, there is hope that Kåre Elvik will manage the reporting for Northern Norway starting in 1978. The logical and practical responsibility for monitoring the registration work is firmly placed with the Reporting Center, which is encouraged to establish a journal system similar to one already planned internally.

Specific Sections and Personnel Changes

Rapporterutinene (Reporting Routines)

K. Stenødegård contributes a section on reporting routines, referencing Circular 101277/KS/SA. He agrees with Fru Fieldberg's views from November 29, 1977, and suggests adopting the routines proposed by NUFOC Øst, with some additions from SA. These proposed routines are to be decided upon and then published in the internal newsletter.

NUFOC VEST and Forskningsseksjonen (Research Section)

NUFOC VEST is to continue sending copies of all material to SA for informational purposes and to support its information section. The Research Section will send its results to SA (UFO Forum) and the Reporting Center. If the Research Section undertakes assignments for a department, it must also send its results to that department.

For significant cases, all organizational units are urged to keep their leaders informed. A standardized form is available for this purpose.

Organizational Structure Proposals

The magazine discusses the idea of an internal newspaper, which has garnered attention in Sweden, with possibilities of starting a similar publication there. It also proposes a new general organizational structure within NUFOC. This involves grouping field researchers within a county or adjacent geographical areas into independent sections, each with a section leader acting as a central point of coordination.

Hønefoss Incident

The issue highlights an incident in Hønefoss, noting that the organization had only two rapid-response sections for the 'stlandet' (Eastern Norway) region, which is considered insufficient given the vast distances. The article suggests that regardless of whether these are called rapid-response sections or something else, the current setup is inadequate. The author, Arne Smevik, recounts not learning about the Hønefoss incident until four days later, which he finds unsatisfactory, especially if it had occurred within his section's operational radius.

Smevik proposes the creation of a 'rapportsentral' (reporting center) where anyone within NUFOC could report a UFO sighting. This center would then alert the relevant section or section leader, with department leaders potentially acting as these reporting centers. This system aims to ensure that the nearest field researcher is dispatched to UFO observations, and if no field researcher is available, the section leader would initiate action. The goal is to facilitate information sharing and reporting duties.

Forskningsseksjonen (Research Section) Personnel Changes

Due to Tom R. Lembs' military service, Jan O. Stavenes will become the administrative leader for the section, and Pavel Tichy will take over as research leader from January 1, 1978. Stavenes has prior experience as an administrative leader in Drammen and was a board member of UFO-Bergen. Pavel Tichy is noted as being active in the Research Section since its inception.

Additionally, Dag Heim is working on establishing a new section in Hønefoss, which would be NUFOC's third rapid-response section for Eastern Norway.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critical assessment of NUFOC's operational efficiency, particularly concerning the follow-up of UFO reports, and the need for organizational reform. The editorial stance is one of constructive criticism, aiming to identify and rectify systemic weaknesses to improve the organization's effectiveness in gathering and processing UFO information. There is a clear emphasis on improving communication, coordination, and the systematic handling of reports across all levels of NUFOC.