Within Claims Process
What the Air Force Denials Left Unexplained
The surviving denial papers confirm rejection and appeal, but redactions leave the Air Force's detailed reasoning outside the public record.
On this page
- The original rejection and later appeal
- What the surviving action sheets actually say
- How redactions limit evaluation of the decision
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
The surviving administrative record from the Cash–Landrum case shows two things with reasonable clarity: the United States Air Force formally rejected the compensation claims and later rejected the claimants’ appeal, but the publicly available file does not fully explain the reasoning behind those decisions. Instead, researchers are left with a patchwork of denial letters, routing sheets and heavily redacted administrative papers released years later under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).[Cufon]cufon.orgOther Files" DirectoryCUFON "Other Files" Directory…
This makes the denial file significant not because it resolves the underlying incident, but because it illustrates the limits of the surviving documentary record. The administrative papers establish the procedural history beyond dispute, yet they reveal only fragments of the Air Force’s internal evaluation.
The original rejection and later appeal
The three claimants filed administrative claims against the Department of the Air Force under the Federal Tort Claims Act before initiating litigation. The later federal complaint states that the claims were presented on 20 December 1982, that the Department of the Air Force issued a final denial on 2 September 1983, and that the lawsuit was filed within the statutory six-month period following that denial.[Cufon]cufon.orgSM The Computer UFO NetworkCUFON SM The Computer UFO Network…
The surviving administrative papers confirm that the claims did not end with an initial rejection. They also document a subsequent administrative appeal, demonstrating that the claimants pursued the available internal review process before turning to federal court. This procedural sequence is important because it shows that the administrative process was exhausted rather than abandoned after the first adverse decision.[Cufon]cufon.orgOther Files" DirectoryCUFON "Other Files" Directory…
What the surviving public record does not provide is a complete, unredacted explanation of the evaluative process that led from the initial claim to the final denial.
What the surviving action sheets actually say
The documents released through FOIA are strongest on administrative facts rather than substantive analysis. They establish:
- separate claims were processed for the individual claimants;
- the Air Force issued formal decisions rather than simply ignoring the submissions;
- administrative routing and review occurred through multiple offices;
- an appeal was received and resolved within the agency; and
- the denials became the procedural foundation for the later federal lawsuit.[Cufon]cufon.orgOther Files" DirectoryCUFON "Other Files" Directory…
These records therefore answer several historical questions. They demonstrate that the Air Force accepted jurisdiction to process a monetary claim against the government even though its representatives had earlier explained that the service no longer operated a programme for investigating UFO reports. Processing the claim did not imply acceptance of the witnesses’ account; it merely reflected the government’s obligation to consider tort claims submitted through the proper legal channel.[Cufon]cufon.orgBergstrom AFB Interview of Betty Cash, Vickie & Colby Landrum, Part 1 of 2August 17, 1981…
The action sheets also indicate that multiple stages of review occurred inside the claims system, but the public versions generally reveal process rather than detailed reasoning.
How redactions limit evaluation of the decision
The greatest limitation of the surviving administrative file is not what it says but what it omits.
Numerous pages released under FOIA contain redactions or consist primarily of routing information rather than analytical discussion. As a result, readers cannot reconstruct the complete internal deliberations surrounding questions such as:
- what investigative steps, if any, were undertaken beyond routine claims processing;
- whether individual factual assertions were examined separately or rejected collectively;
- how Air Force lawyers evaluated the reported helicopter component of the incident;
- whether alternative explanations were formally discussed in memoranda that remain partially withheld or unavailable; and
- whether disagreements existed within the administrative review chain.[Cufon]cufon.orgOther Files" DirectoryCUFON "Other Files" Directory…
Because those portions are absent from the public record, it is impossible to determine whether the final denial rested primarily on factual findings, legal standards under the Federal Tort Claims Act, lack of evidence connecting the alleged injuries to government activity, or some combination of those factors. The surviving papers simply do not preserve enough unredacted analysis to distinguish confidently among those possibilities.
Importantly, this evidentiary gap should not be interpreted as proof of either concealment or vindication. A missing explanation is not itself evidence supporting the witnesses’ account, nor is it evidence disproving it. It instead marks the boundary of what the released administrative record can establish.
What can be concluded from the available file
Taken together, the denial papers provide a narrow but reliable set of conclusions.
The documents confirm that the Air Force:
- received and processed the claims;
- formally rejected them;
- considered an administrative appeal;[irs.gov]irs.govSource details in endnotes.
- upheld the denial; and
- completed the administrative process before the federal litigation began.[Cufon]cufon.orgSM The Computer UFO NetworkCUFON SM The Computer UFO Network…
Beyond those procedural facts, the record becomes increasingly opaque. The released papers do not contain a complete, publicly accessible explanation of the agency’s reasoning, and the surviving redactions prevent historians from fully evaluating how Air Force officials assessed particular factual allegations. Consequently, the administrative file is valuable chiefly as evidence of what occurred procedurally rather than as a comprehensive account of why the claims failed.
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to What the Air Force Denials Left Unexplained. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
The Federal Information Manual
This reference focuses on the vast amount of federal information and the legal framework that controls the government's collection, manag...
UFOs and Government: A Historical Inquiry
Governments around the world have had to deal with the UFO phenomenon for a good part of a century. How and why they did so is the subjec...
The Rise of the Right to Know: Politics and the Culture of Tr...
Modern transparency dates to the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s—well before the Internet. Michael Schudson shows how the “right to know” has def...
The Art of Access: Strategies for Acquiring Public Records
NEW TO THIS EDITION: 40 additional experts and practitioners offer tips and record ideas for opening new doorways into FOI and open data....
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Selected fromUFO poster oneBay.co.uk.
Endnotes
1.
Source: cufon.org
Title: “Other Files” Directory
Link:https://www.cufon.org/cufon/cufon-o.htm
Source snippet
CUFON "Other Files" Directory...
2.
Source: cufon.org
Title:SMThe Computer UFO Network
Link:https://www.cufon.org/cufon/cashlanL.pdf
Source snippet
CUFON<sup>SM</sup>The Computer UFO Network...
3.
Source: cufon.org
Link:https://www.cufon.org/cufon/cashlani.htm
Source snippet
Bergstrom AFB Interview of [Betty Cash]({{ 'betty-cash/' | relative_url }}), Vickie & [Colby Landrum]({{ 'colby-landrum/' | relative_url }}), Part 1 of 2August 17, 1981...
Published: August 17, 1981
4.
Source: cufon.org
Title: Bergstrom AFB Interview of Betty Cash, Vickie & Colby Landrum, Part 2 of 2
Link:https://www.cufon.org/cufon/cashlani2.htm
Source snippet
Bergstrom AFB Interview of Betty Cash, Vickie & Colby Landrum, Part 2 of 2...
Additional References
5.
Source: legalclarity.org
Title: How to Appeal a FOIA Denial: From Agency to Court
Link:https://legalclarity.org/how-to-appeal-a-foia-denial-from-agency-to-court/
Source snippet
May 15, 2026 — HOW TO APPEAL A FOIA DENIAL: FROM AGENCY TO COURT A FOIA denial doesn't have to be final — knowing the right l...
Published: May 15, 2026
6.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiCgBn-Kbho
Source snippet
Betty Cash, Vickie and Colby Landrum on witnessing a fiery diamond-shaped UFO, December 29, 1980...
Published: December 29, 1980
7.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izTljlO2Css
Source snippet
The Cash-Landrum incident: traumatized & physically ill after terrifying UFO encounter, Dec 29, 1980...
8.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euP0SnHKfg8
Source snippet
Rare interview with researcher John F. Schuessler on the 1980 [Cash-Landrum UFO incident]({{ 'cash-landrum-ufo-incident/' | relative_url }})...
9.
Source: wikidisc.org
Title: Cash–Landrum incident | Wiki Disc
Link:https://www.wikidisc.org/wiki/Cash%E2%80%93Landrum_incident
Source snippet
Cash–Landrum incident | WikiDiscJuly 1, 2026 — ^{[6]} Civilian researchers attempted to locate other potential witnesses who might have o...
Published: July 1, 2026
10.
Source: legalclarity.org
Title: Redacted Government Documents: FOIA Exemptions and Appeals
Link:https://legalclarity.org/redacted-government-documents-how-to-request-and-challenge/
Source snippet
These are the only grounds for redaction, and each one protects a distinct interest:^{7}U.S. Depar...
11.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Betty Cash, Vickie and Colby Landrum on witnessing a fiery diamond-shaped UFO,
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJdhk3_DurE
Source snippet
Rare interview with Colby Landrum on his 1980 UFO encounter...
Published: December 29, 1980
12.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukTVzsBOYUM
Source snippet
Cash Landrum UFO incident Air Force The Most Detailed Cash–Landrum UFO Incident | Documentary for Sleep...
13.
Source: irs.gov
Link:https://www.irs.gov/irm/part8/irm
14.
Source: fincen.gov
Link:https://www.fincen.gov/filing-foia-request