One of the chief mysteries in the LENA perigee pass data is the lack of an apparent auroral oval in the images. Another is that in some cases ENA are seen from any direction near the Earth regardless of the latitude of the spacecraft. These facts lead one to ask a fundamental question: Is the instrument responding to ENA primarily? One possible way to get out of the "ambiguity" of the data is to assume that at least part of the signal is produced by something other than ENA. The two main candidates for this "something else" are UV light and energetic charged particles. UV light could only effect the instrument when its fan shaped aperture points toward the source. The most intense of which will be the sun, with day glow being the second strongest and the auroral zone, the third. We can rule out UV light as a prime source of counts in the perigee pass data for the following reasons: 1) The perigee pass signal is different in form and much stronger than the sun pulse signal seen just before or just after perigee; 2) There is no indication of the auroral zone, which would produce at least two peaks in the counts versus spin phase curve; 3) Mike Colliers' analysis of the sun pulse signal shows that it varies with the flux of the solar wind and not with variations in the solar UV flux. Charge particles that enter the aperture of the instrument and produce counts would show up when the instrument looks in the direction from which they come. In all of the data I am analyzing voltages were being applied to the collimators so that most charged particles should have been excluded from the instrument but this effect could still show up where the flux of energetic particles is high enough. The most likely place would be in the auroral zone where energetic electrons and protons precipitate. If these particles are producing counts then they should be seen when the instrument looks in and near the zenith direction. In nearly all of the perigee passes the zenith direction is devoid of counts.