Valle Classfications

The Vallee Classification System By Jacques Vallee In 1990 Jacques Vallee, Ph.D., developed the Vallee Classification System. Expanding on the Hynek System, Vallee produced a methodology for classifying UFO experiences that takes into account more details, including the reliability of the witness and the possibility of mundane explanations.Vallee's goal was to apply the scientific method to UFO research. He holds degrees in mathematics, astrophysics, and computer science, and has written many books. Vallee was the real-life model for the character played by François Truffaut in Steven Spielberg's film Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Vallee has since distanced himself from the UFOlogy field.

One thing to keep in mind is the MILAB (Military Abductions) which has yet to have a classification system. Military Abductions are well documented in the United States and often are involved with the U.S. Navy, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army, Department of Defense, Central Intelligence Agency, Department of Homeland Security, and para-military sanctioned groups/progams (MK Ultra, Project Monarch, etc).

The Vallee Classification System categorizes UFO sightings using five principal ratings: AN; MA; FB; CE; and SVP, which is divided into three subcategories, labeled SRR, SVR, and PER.

AN Rating Classifies any anomalous phenomenon.
AN1 - Anomalies that leave no lasting physical effects, such as lights in the sky and similar phenomena.
AN2 - Anomalies that leave lasting physical effects, such as crop circles, scorched earth, and debris.
AN3 - Anomalies with associated occupants or entities.AN4 - Interaction of the witness with occupants or entities.
AN5 - Anomalous reports of injury or death, such as unexplained wounds, healing of wounds, or spontaneous human combustion.

MA Rating Describes the behavior of a UFO.
MA1 - A visual sighting of a UFO that travels in a discontinuous trajectory, such as loops, quick turns, or vast changes in altitude.
MA2 - A visual sighting of a UFO with physical evidence, such as burn marks or material fragments.
MA3 - A visual sighting of a UFO with living entities on or around the UFO.
MA4 - UFO activity, such as maneuvers, accompanied by a change in the observer's perception of reality.
MA5 - UFO activity that results in the injury or death of the witness.

FB Rating Fly-by rating.
FB1 - A fly-by of a UFO traveling in a straight line across the sky.
FB2 - A fly-by of a UFO traveling in a straight line, leaving some kind of physical evidence.
FB3 - A fly-by of a UFO traveling in a straight line across the sky, where entities are observed on board.
FB4 - A fly-by where the witness experiences a sensation of unreality, i.e., a phantasmagoric state.
FB5 - A fly-by that causes permanent injury to, or the death of, the witness.

CE Rating Close Encounter rating.
CE1 - A visual sighting of a UFO within 500 feet.
CE2 - A visual sighting of a UFO within 500 feet with physical evidence.
CE3 - A visual sighting of a UFO with entities aboard.
CE4 - Abduction of a witness.
CE4-A - Abducted witness suffers from physical or psychological injuries, or death.
SVP Rating A three-digit credibility rating. Marks ranging from zero to four are given in each of three subcategories: source reliability (first digit); site visit (second digit); and possible explanations (third digit).
CE5 - Encounter with entities established in a mutual contact (**New**)


SRR Source Reliability Rating
0 - Unknown or unreliable source.
1 - Report attributed to a known source of unknown reliability.
2 - Reliable source, second-hand.
3 - Reliable source, first-hand.
4 - First-hand, personal interview with the witness by a source of proven credibility.

SVR Site Visit Rating
0 - No site visit, or answer unknown.
1 - Site visit by a casual person not familiar with the phenomenon.
2 - Site visited by persons familiar with the phenomenon.
3 - Site visit by reliable investigator with some experience.
4 - Site visit by a skilled analyst.

PER Possible Explanations Rating
0 - Data consistent with one or more natural causes.
1 - Natural explanation requires only slight modification of the data.
2 - Natural explanation requires major alteration of one parameter.
3 - Natural explanation requires major alteration of several parameters.
4 - No natural explanation possible, given the evidence.