GEPAN Field Investigation Reports
When GEPAN dispatched a team, they brought soil kits, radiation monitors, and structured interview protocols. These are the resulting case files: forensic investigations of French UFO sites conducted by CNES scientists between 1979 and 1986.
Investigation Protocol
Not every report triggered a field deployment. GEPAN set thresholds: multiple witnesses, physical traces, or corroboration from military or aviation sources. The investigation protocol was built by Claude Poher, GEPAN's founding director, who designed it to meet the same evidentiary standards applied to any other CNES aerospace research. When a case qualified, the enquête followed a fixed protocol. Structured witness interviews first, with notes on consistency, psychological state, and independent corroboration. Then site surveys. Soil and vegetation sampling where traces were reported. Environmental conditions reconstructed for the time of the sighting.
The reports read like forensic case files because that is what they are. Soil samples went to CNES laboratories for chemical analysis. Vegetation was examined for radiation or heat exposure. Ground impressions were measured, photographed, and mapped. Witness testimony was cross-checked against every other data source available.
Trans-en-Provence, January 1981. A witness reported an object landing briefly in his garden. GEPAN's team collected soil and vegetation from the trace site and sent it to CNES laboratories. The results: chlorophyll degradation, cellular damage consistent with electromagnetic radiation or intense heat, biochemical changes with no conventional explanation. The case remains Category D (unexplained) in GEIPAN's database today.
Scientific Rigour
All reports are in French and follow the formal structure of French scientific documentation: methodology, raw data, analysis, conclusions. The investigators had laboratory access through CNES. No civilian UFO organisation anywhere in the world could match that capability.
Context matters here. By the time GEPAN dispatched its first field team, the United States had shut down Project Blue Book a decade earlier. The UK's MOD collected reports but rarely sent anyone to look at the site. Australia's RAAF conducted interviews but had no laboratory resources. GEPAN had trained field investigators, structured protocols, and a space agency behind them. Nobody else was running UFO investigations at this level.
The A-to-D classification system used in these reports was developed in GEPAN's Technical Notes series. The Valensole encounter of 1965 was the kind of physical-trace case that directly informed GEPAN's field investigation methodology. French sighting records from across the archive are collected on the France sightings page.
Document Inventory
| Category | Description | Reports | Date Range |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enquêtes | Full field investigation case reports | 8 | 1979 to 1986 |
| Witness Interviews | Structured testimony records (within case reports) | Subset | 1979 to 1986 |
| Physical Analysis | Soil, vegetation, and trace evidence reports (within case reports) | Subset | 1979 to 1986 |
Investigation Format
Each enquête was a numbered CNES document, not a memo or a summary. The format was fixed before investigators left for the field.
GEPAN field investigation reports followed a rigorous scientific protocol. Structured witness interviews came first, with separate sessions where corroboration could be checked. Site surveys followed: soil and vegetation sampling where ground traces were present, radiation measurements using calibrated instruments, atmospheric conditions reconstructed for the time of the sighting. Each enquête was assigned a number and filed as an official CNES document, subject to the same archival standards as any other space agency research output.
The classification system used to categorise cases in these reports was developed in the Technical Notes series. GEPAN's broader research output, including public opinion surveys and atmospheric studies, is in the Surveys and Reports collection.
