Pilot witness in Pyr�n�es-Atlantiques, France

It's routine for Emma in the Biarritz-Parme control tower on the morning of January 16, 2001. Day is breaking and the sky is clear. Around 7:45 a.m. the phone rings. It's her colleague José from the San Sebastian Fuenterrabia control tower, who is observing a fixed bright point above the sea and is trying to find out whether the observation is confirmed at Biarritz. Indeed, the phenomenon is detected, although no radar detection is noted. The observed light flickers, and faced with this suspicious phenomenon, the two controllers, who remain in telephone contact, each apply on their own side the safety procedures provided for in this case. José, the Spanish air traffic controller, calls Madrid air traffic control, which confirms it has no air traffic in the area, then the Bilbao military air traffic control, which gives the same answer. On the other hand, a plot is recorded by the Torrejon radar control. Is it the same phenomenon? For her part, Emma conducts equivalent investigations with the Bordeaux air traffic control, which has observed nothing, nor have the military, also questioned. The phenomenon will disappear after about half an hour. All this information is transmitted the same day by fax to SEPRA, which in turn contacts the CCOA at Taverny. The latter has detected nothing unusual but takes charge of obtaining confirmation of the unknown radar detection made by the Torrejon military. They deny it shortly after. Within CNES itself, a check is launched to identify a possible balloon launch from the Aire-sur-Adour center. Here again, the result is negative and the observation keeps its mystery. A decision is then made to investigate on site, and on February 2, 2001, the head of SEPRA interviews the two witnesses, in Biarritz and San Sebastian, and they carry out a reconstruction and measurements. These measurements, made with a theodolite, provide crucial information. Indeed, the direction of observation of the phenomenon is identical seen from Biarritz and from San Sebastian, which are about 40 km apart. The observed phenomenon is therefore located very far away and cannot be explained by an aircraft. This case will be classified as B by SEPRA: probable astronomical observation. CASE RE-EXAMINATION: GEIPAN continues to publish all of its archives on its public website www.geipan.fr. Among its publications are old cases classified at the time as type "B" cases, which are now the subject of a re-examination, for the sole purpose of being more relevant in the conclusions. This observation case is one of the cases classified as "B" in 2001 by SEPRA. Thanks to new technical means (software) and the investigation experience acquired over all these recent years, this re-examination sometimes leads to new remarks or even a change of classification explained in an investigation note. This case is consistent (two witnesses, both air traffic controllers), the description of the observed UAP is very precise. The sincerity and credibility of the witnesses have never been questioned. The described phenomenon presents many common characteristics (observation duration, shape, size, color) with a perfectly known astronomical object: the star Capella, affected by exceptional scintillation due to particular atmospheric conditions. It is not the witnesses' visual perception that is in question, but the interpretation that the witnesses make of their observation through their feelings (astonishment, night observation, unusual scintillation). In GEIPAN's current classification, this case of low strangeness is classified as UAP A, observation linked to a misidentification with the star Capella.