Opinion ID: 421806
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Records created by Congress.

Text: 27 From the record it appears that the SSCI itself generated only five of the disputed documents--all three of the FBI records and two of the CIA documents. 32 Applying the two-pronged Goland test, we find that neither the circumstances surrounding the creation of the documents nor the conditions under which they were transferred to the agencies manifests a clear congressional intent to maintain control. 28 When Congress created the five documents in this case, it affixed no external indicia of control or confidentiality on the faces of the documents. 33 That the SSCI knew quite well how to classify its documents as secret is most clear from the fact that the Committee so stamped at least seven other of its documents related to the Paisley investigation--documents which were later requested by appellant, but which were properly held by the District Court to be exempt congressional documents in light of their classification markings. 34 Furthermore, the Government has not shown that the hearings which resulted in the three transcripts of testimony were conducted under any special conditions of secrecy. 35 29 Similarly, the documents at issue were not subsequently sent to the FBI and the CIA in such a way as to manifest any intent by Congress to retain control. The Government points to no contemporaneous and specific instructions from the SSCI to the agencies limiting either the use or disclosure of the documents. 36 Instead, the Government seeks to rely on an exchange of correspondence between the SSCI and the CIA as proof of the existence of a pre-existing agreement that any and all documents exchanged between the CIA and the SSCI would require review and approval by the Committee prior to public disclosure. 37 We do not consider these six letters to constitute sufficient evidence of Congress' intent to retain control over these particular documents. 30 The only two letters that specifically refer to the Paisley investigation were written [229 U.S.App.D.C. 381] in 1981 by the FBI and the CIA to the SSCI and simply indicate the agencies' belief that the documents now at issue are congressional in nature. There is no response from the Committee. Such one-sided correspondence initiated long after the original creation and transfer of the documents simply constitutes post hoc rationalization by the agencies. Cf. Holy Spirit Ass'n for Unification of World Christianity v. CIA, supra, 636 F.2d at 842 (letter from Clerk of House of Representatives written after transfer of records does not establish congressional control). 31 The remaining letters, written during 1978-82, do indicate the Committee's desire to prevent release without its approval of any documents generated by the Committee or by an intelligence agency in response to a Committee inquiry. 38 However, there is no discussion of any particular documents or of any particular criteria by which to evaluate and limit the breadth of this interdiction. We thus find these letters too general and sweeping to provide sufficient proof, when standing alone, of a specific intent to transfer these five Paisley documents to the FBI and the CIA for a limited purpose and on condition of secrecy. Goland v. CIA, supra, 607 F.2d at 348 n. 48. 39 In sum, nothing in either the circumstances of the documents' creation or the conditions attending their transfer provides the requisite express indication of a congressional intent to maintain exclusive control over these particular records. 32