FBI-UAP-D002 is a Federal Bureau of Investigation Electronic Communication document released in PURSUE Release 03 on June 12, 2026. The originating agency is the FBI; the reported incident location is the Cheyenne Mountain area near Colorado Springs, Colorado, with an incident year of 2022. The document records a forensic sketch interview conducted with a former U.S. Army intelligence officer who witnessed an unidentified aerial phenomenon, and it was released as part of the Department of War's ongoing UAP disclosure effort.123
Provenance and Document Form
The record is an FBI FD-1057 (Rev. 5-8-10), the bureau's standard Electronic Communication form used to record investigative activity. It is designated an Official Record within FBI administrative practice. The FD-1057 header carries the standard administrative fields: title, date, sender details, approving authority listed as an Assistant Special Agent in Charge, a drafter name, and a case identifier. All of these identifying fields, along with the witness's personal details, specific case numbers, and several dates, are redacted in the released version.
The communication references two enclosures: a redacted item and an attached sketch draft. The latter was produced during the forensic interview itself and submitted alongside this communication. The document notes that the Operational Projects Unit forensic artist would relay additional sketch drafts through the interviewing Special Agent to the witness, allowing for iterative refinement until a final sketch product was completed. This iterative process reflects standard forensic artistic practice and indicates the Bureau invested meaningful effort in capturing the witness's account visually.
The interview was conducted at 26 Federal Plaza, New York, NY 10278, the location of the FBI's New York Field Office. The date of the interview is partially redacted but falls in July 2024, indicating the Bureau was still actively working this case at least two years after the reported incident year of 2022.
The Forensic Interview Process
The FBI's Operational Projects Unit provides specialized forensic-interview and forensic-art capabilities in support of investigative matters. The involvement of both a Special Agent and an OPU forensic artist in this interview indicates the case was handled through a structured, two-person protocol designed to elicit and document witness perceptions with precision. Per the document, the interviewee was advised of the identities of both interviewing individuals at the outset, consistent with FBI interview standards.
The stated purpose of the interview was to aid in the forensic recreation of the UAP and its activity observed over Cheyenne Mountain. This framing -- "forensic recreation" -- signals that the Bureau's objective was not simply to log a complaint but to produce an authoritative visual reconstruction of what the witness reported seeing. The existence of a sketch attachment, and the planned follow-on drafts, supports that conclusion.
Extensive redactions throughout the body of the document obscure names, dates, contact information, and case identifiers. The redaction pattern is consistent with the protection of witness identities and ongoing investigative equities rather than the suppression of substantive observational content.
Witness Background and Observation Context
The interviewee is identified in the document only as a former U.S. Army intelligence officer, with name and personal details redacted. The witness's background in Army intelligence is a notable provenance detail: trained observers with experience assessing aerial and other threats are generally considered more credible reporters of anomalous aerial phenomena than untrained members of the public, and the Bureau's decision to pursue a formal forensic-sketch process with this individual suggests the case was taken seriously.
The observation involved multiple witnesses. The former Army intelligence officer was accompanied by four other members of his unit as they exited their office building in the Cheyenne Mountain area. A five-person group observation reduces the likelihood of individual perceptual error and provides a basis for corroboration, though the released document contains only the account of the primary interviewee.
Observation Conditions
The UAP was observed on a date in February 2024, at approximately 11:25 am local time. The weather conditions on the day of the sighting were notably favorable for aerial observation. The witness described a clear "blue bird" sky with no cloud cover and minimal humidity. The ambient temperature was approximately 50 degrees Fahrenheit. The combination of high visibility, daytime lighting, and the absence of atmospheric obscurants would have provided optimal conditions for observing and assessing an aerial object's physical characteristics.
Physical Description of the UAP
The witness account provides an unusually detailed morphological description of the observed object. Key characteristics reported are as follows.
Shape: The object was described as "potato" shaped, with distinct edges. This describes an irregular, roughly ovoid form rather than a conventional symmetric aircraft silhouette.
Color and surface appearance: The object appeared to be a creamy or whitish opalescent color. The witness described it as somewhat translucent with a slight shimmer, suggesting an unusual surface quality with possible semi-transparent or light-diffusing properties.
Surface composition: The most distinctive reported feature was the object's surface structure. The witness described it as composed of articulating panels resembling fish scales or individual segments that were non-symmetrical, non-overlapping, and irregularly shaped. Unlike conventional aircraft paneling or known structural materials, these surface elements appeared to be individual, autonomous components rather than integrated hull sections.
Surface motion: While the object itself remained perfectly stationary relative to the observers, the individual panels exhibited coordinated dynamic behavior. Each panel shifted in slow waves across the object's surface. The waves appeared to originate at different starting points simultaneously but remained synchronized. The witness's account of coordinated, multi-origin wave motion across a stationary object presents behavioral characteristics without an obvious conventional explanation.
Size: The document as released does not include a precise size estimate, as the relevant portions may be redacted or were not specified in the available text.
Departure and Disappearance
The observation lasted approximately two minutes before the object vanished. The witness's description of the disappearance is specific: the object "cloaked" in the space of time it took to turn one's head, indicating a nearly instantaneous disappearance rather than a conventional departure involving acceleration or receding distance. The witness additionally noted that no shadow was associated with the object at any point during the observation -- neither before, during, nor after the event.
The absence of a shadow is a significant observational detail. Under the stated conditions (clear sky, 11:25 am, February, Colorado) a physical object of any meaningful size would be expected to cast a discernible shadow on the ground or on nearby structures. The witness's explicit comment on the absence of a shadow suggests either that the object possessed unusual light-interaction properties or that it was at an altitude or angle where a shadow would not be visible to ground-level observers.
What The Record Supports
FBI-UAP-D002 establishes that the Federal Bureau of Investigation formally recorded and initiated investigative follow-up on a multi-witness UAP observation reported in the Cheyenne Mountain area of Colorado Springs. The Bureau engaged its Operational Projects Unit forensic art capability and conducted a structured interview at the New York Field Office in July 2024, producing at minimum one sketch draft with further iterations planned.
The record documents what a former U.S. Army intelligence officer and four colleagues reported observing, under conditions of high visibility, in February 2024. The morphological description -- irregular opalescent shape, articulating non-symmetric surface panels with synchronized wave motion, instantaneous disappearance, absence of shadow -- is documented as witness testimony. The document does not identify the object, does not offer an analytical conclusion, and does not rule any explanation in or out. The case is labeled unresolved in the PURSUE Release 03 dataset, and the FD-1057 itself contains no findings or recommendations from the FBI. The record's value is as a formally documented, witness-sourced account produced through a structured federal investigative process, not as dispositive evidence of any particular explanation.