FBI-UAP-D037: FD-302 - Multiple Red Lights in the Western United States, 2026, and the Watch Anomaly

Source file: FBI-UAP-D037_FD-302_Multiple-Red-Lights_2026.pdf Originating agency: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Document type: FBI form FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10), interview recorded by two Special Agents Date: 2026; the exact dates of the incident and of the interview are redacted in the released pages Classification: No classification marking on the released pages; carries the standard FBI dissemination caveat Page count: 3 VIRIN: 260807-O-D0360-1157 PURSUE Release: 5

Summary

In terms of the quality of the testimony it preserves, this is one of the strongest documents in the fifth PURSUE release: a three-page FD-302 interview, conducted by two FBI Special Agents, with a U.S. person who described a series of sightings of unidentified lights in the western United States in 2026. According to the official war.gov description, the interviewee recounted three incidents occurring within a period of about five hours.

All names, precise locations, facility names and exact dates are redacted in the released version. What remains is the descriptive core of the testimony itself, and it is unusually detailed: shapes, colors, bearings, distances estimated in meters and feet, durations, and the difference between what was seen with the naked eye and what was seen through night vision optics.

The document also contains one detail with almost no parallel elsewhere in the collection: a record of a measured deviation in a mechanical watch, which the interviewing agents took the trouble to set down in full, including a control measurement the interviewee carried out himself over the following 24 hours.

A companion document in the collection, FBI-UAP-D040, records a telephonic interview with the second individual who was present during the events. Two FBI digital renderings, FBI-UAP-D038 and FBI-UAP-D039, accompany this document.

Research Article

The drive and the first sighting

According to the document, the interviewee and a companion left at approximately 7:45 PM and were headed to a location on the central or northern portion of an area whose identity is redacted. The weather at the time is stated explicitly: "Weather condition at the time was rainy with significant cloud cover." Roughly thirty minutes later, that is, at about 8:00 PM to 8:30 PM, the interviewee saw two unidentified lights in the sky, pulled over to the side of the road and exited the vehicle to investigate.

The initial description is sharp: the lights were "dash" shaped and dull red to the naked eye, and they moved along the ridgeline of the mountains to his west. The interviewee was equipped with Night Optical Devices (NODs) and observed the lights through those as well.

Here appears one of the most significant technical details in the testimony: through the night vision optics the apparent shape changed. The lights appeared "orb-like" or circular, surrounded by the characteristic "NOD halo" that occurs when a light source is viewed through such devices. In other words, the interviewee himself noticed that the optics altered the perceived shape, and pointed this out to the agents.

The observer's competence, and the astigmatism

The document devotes considerable space to establishing the observer's competence, and this is what fundamentally distinguishes it from an ordinary civilian sighting report. The interviewee stated that he is very familiar with using NODs, having used them for more than 25 years and accumulated many hours of experience. Later in the document it is recorded that he had spent a considerable amount of time at a facility, whose identity is redacted, looking up at the night sky, and was familiar with how stars, satellites and meteors look both to the naked eye and through NODs.

At the same time, the document does not conceal the limits of the testimony, and that is precisely one of its strengths. The interviewee stated that he has astigmatism. While the objects appeared "dash-shaped" to him, his companion stated they appeared triangular or diamond-shaped, "which could possibly be attributed to [the interviewee's] astigmatism." The agents recorded the contradiction between the two witnesses, and the possible explanation for it, rather than smoothing it over.

The sequence of lights: overhead, to the east, and in the dry wash

After approximately twenty minutes, both of the first two lights disappeared. Shortly thereafter the interviewee observed another, similar light appear directly above their location, visible for approximately ten minutes before it too disappeared.

Sometime between 10:00 PM and 11:00 PM, another similar light appeared an estimated 600 meters to the east of their position, and appeared to be approximately 500 feet above their vehicle. The light appeared to move toward them and stopped approximately 400 meters away. A second light then appeared, moved toward the first and stopped in proximity to it. The next detail is among the most extraordinary in the entire account: the second light appeared to be approximately six feet off the ground.

While watching the two lights to the east, the interviewee noticed a light in his peripheral vision descend from altitude and stop in a dry wash approximately 100 meters behind them. He could not directly see the light source, but he observed the glow emanating from the wash, and watched the glow move through it.

The two entered their vehicle and drove up to the next intersection in an attempt to get a better view of the lights to their east. On arrival, the lights were no longer observed. They returned to their original position but were unable to re-acquire them. One of them walked 10 to 20 meters away from the vehicle to look around the area; the other remained near the vehicle.

The watch anomaly

The most thoroughly documented detail in the report, and the most unusual, comes at this point in the sequence.

The interviewee adjusted the filter on his NODs in order to look at his watch, which displayed approximately 1:00 AM, estimated from memory. The document notes that this was a men's automatic analog watch, with the manufacturer's name redacted. He walked back to the vehicle to check his phone, which displayed 12:40 AM.

He noted the discrepancy, compared the time on his watch to the time on his phone and to the vehicle's digital clock, and found that his watch was 25 minutes ahead. He relayed the discrepancy to his companion, whose digital watch displayed the same time as the phones and the vehicle clock.

The agents also recorded the background facts that give the discrepancy its meaning. The interviewee had owned the watch for approximately five years, and it had never been off by more than 60 to 90 seconds. He had last checked the time on it at approximately 10:00 PM, and it was accurate then. He stated that his watch was the only mechanical, analog, non-digital clock in the vicinity at that time, and that it was the only clock displaying a different time.

Finally, the measurement the interviewee performed himself: he did not adjust the watch or reset the time for 24 hours, in order to see whether it continued to malfunction. The result, as recorded, is that the watch continued to keep accurate time but remained approximately 25 minutes fast.

It should be stated plainly: the document draws no causal connection between the lights and the watch. Nor does it offer any explanation. This is a record of an anomaly set down by the interviewing agents, and nothing more. Its value lies in the fact that it is checkable, quantified, and accompanied by an improvised control group of four other timepieces in the vicinity that all agreed.

What the witness ruled out

The final part of the document addresses the elimination of alternative explanations, and here too the language is careful. The interviewee stated that the lights he observed were unlike anything he had seen before. He noted that they did not behave like satellites: satellites track linearly across the sky, whereas these did not. They moved around, changed direction, and appeared as low as six feet off the ground.

To this the document adds an important geometric point, stated explicitly: the low-elevation lights described would have been backdropped by the mountains and below the relative horizon line. That means they cannot easily be attributed to distant illuminated bodies in the sky.

The interviewee further stated that what he observed was not an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) familiar to him; that he noted no exhaust or tail when the objects moved; and that they exhibited no audible sound signature. He attempted to observe the objects through thermal optics, but was unsuccessful. That last detail matters evidentially: the failure of the thermal optics is reported simply as an attempt that did not succeed, and is not presented as evidence of anything.

No physiological effects were recorded. The interviewee stated that the observations did not induce a fear or agitation response, just curiosity. The detail that closes the document is a notably human one: the two conversed about this afterward and, given their backgrounds, found it strange that they had not felt fear or threatened during their observations. The interviewee provided his contact information and was open to further contact from the agents.

The renderings and the companion document

Two FBI digital renderings accompany this statement. FBI-UAP-D038 shows a person standing beside a vehicle looking at two red lights above a mountainous landscape; FBI-UAP-D039 shows a large bright object surrounded by concentric circles as seen through binoculars. Both are artist reconstructions prepared from the observers' descriptions, not photographs. They illustrate the testimony; they are not additional evidence for it.

The companion document in the collection, FBI-UAP-D040, records a telephonic interview with the second individual who was present during the events, as the official description of both documents states.

Significance

The value of this document arises from a combination of four factors.

First, the observer's competence: 25 years of experience with night vision optics, prior familiarity with how stars, satellites and meteors appear through those same devices, and an independent attempt to corroborate with thermal optics.

Second, quantification: the document is dense with numbers that can be examined -- 600 meters, 500 feet, 400 meters, 100 meters, six feet, 25 minutes. Testimony that can be tested is worth more than testimony framed in generalities.

Third, candor about weaknesses: the document records the witness's astigmatism, the disagreement between the two witnesses about shape, the effect of the optics on perceived shape, and the failure of the thermal attempt. That is a marker of reliable documentation, not of weak documentation.

Fourth, the watch anomaly: a measurable event, with an improvised control group, re-checked over 24 hours, and recorded without the interviewing agents attempting to tie it to anything.

Alongside this it must be said clearly what the document is not. It contains no FBI determination as to the nature of the lights. It contains no radar data, no imagery, and no sensor of any kind beyond the eyes and optics of two people. It gives no precise location, no exact date and no names. And as the standard caption at the foot of the form itself states: the document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI.

Key People

Locations

Incidents

Notable Quotes

"Weather condition at the time was rainy with significant cloud cover." -- page 1

"[Redacted] described the lights as 'dash' shaped and dull red in color to the naked eye. The lights moved along the ridgeline of the mountains to his west." -- page 1

"[Redacted] relayed that, despite being 'dash-shaped' to the naked eye, the lights appeared 'orb-like' or circular through the NODs, with the characteristic 'NOD halo' around them, which is typical when looking at a light source through NODs." -- page 1

"[Redacted] stated that he has astigmatism and while the objects appeared 'dash-shaped' to him, [redacted] stated they appeared triangular or diamond-shaped, which could possibly be attributed to [redacted] astigmatism." -- page 1

"The second light appeared to be approximately 6 feet off the ground." -- page 2

"Although [redacted] could not directly see the light source, he observed the glow emanating from the wash. [Redacted] watched the glow move through the wash." -- page 2

"[Redacted] noted the discrepancy, compared the time displayed on his watch to the time displayed on his phone and observed that the time on his watch was 25 minutes ahead of the time on his phone and the vehicle's digital clock." -- page 2

"[Redacted] stated that his watch was the only mechanical/analog/non-digital clock in the vicinity at that time and it was the only clock that displayed a different time." -- page 2

"[Redacted] did not adjust his watch or reset the time for 24 hours to see if it continued to malfunction; the watch continued to keep accurate time but remained ~25 minutes fast." -- page 2

"[Redacted] stated that the lights he observed on [redacted] did not behave like satellites, as satellites track linear across the sky, whereas these did not." -- page 3

"The low-elevation lights described would have been backdropped by the mountains and below the relative horizon line." -- page 3

"[Redacted] noted no exhaust or tail when these objects moved, and they exhibited no audible sound signature. [Redacted] attempted to observe the objects through thermal optics, but was unsuccessful." -- page 3

"[Redacted] stated that the observations did not induce a fear or agitation response - just curiosity." -- page 3

"This document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI." -- page 1