burlison-mitre-uap-interrogatories-2026-05-22

Rep. Eric Burlison — legislative interrogatories & production requests to The MITRE Corporation on UAP records (May 22, 2026)

Author: Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO-07), Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets. Recipients: Dr. Mark Peters (President/CEO) and Christopher Land (SVP/General Counsel), The MITRE Corporation. Letter dated: 2026-05-22. Source: official PDF, burlison.house.gov (mitre_uap-legislative-interrogatories_press.pdf) — https://burlison.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/burlison.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/mitre_uap-legislative-interrogatories_press.pdf Extraction: pymupdf4llm from the official 10-page PDF, captured 2026-06-03 (letterhead image omitted by the extractor). Full verbatim text. Announced via tweet-burlison-mitre-uap-records-demand-2026-05-31. Analysis: burlison-uap-oversight.

---

1108 Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 (202) 225-6536

ERIC BURLISON 7[TH] DISTRICT, MISSOURI

Oversight and Government Reform Committee

Transportation and Infrastructure Committee

> picture [270 x 75] intentionally omitted <

3232 E. Ridgeview St. Springfield, MO 65804 (417) 889-1800

2727 E. 32nd St., Ste. 2 Joplin, MO 64804 (417) 781-1041

http://burlison.house.gov

May 22, 2026

Dr. Mark Peters, Ph.D. President and Chief Executive Officer The MITRE Corporation 7525 Colshire Drive McLean, VA 22102

Mr. Christopher Land SVP, General Counsel The MITRE Corporation 7525 Colshire Drive McLean, VA 2210

Dear Dr. Peters and Mr. Land:

As a member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform’s Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets, I am transmitting the enclosed legislative interrogatories and production requests to The MITRE Corporation. The purpose of this request is straightforward: to determine whether MITRE, any MITRE-operated federally funded research and development center (FFRDC), or any MITRE subcontractor has created, received, maintained, analyzed, transferred, destroyed, withheld, or otherwise controlled records, data, materials, contract deliverables, or program information relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP), unidentified aerospace or undersea phenomena, transmedium events, technologies of unknown origin, anomalous recovered materials, foreign material acquisition or exploitation activities, or any program known, alleged, or described as a legacy crash-retrieval or reverse-engineering effort.

MITRE occupies a distinctive position in the federal enterprise. MITRE publicly represents that it operates multiple FFRDCs that provide technical expertise, continuity, and systems-engineering support to government sponsors, including national security, homeland security, aviation, cyber, health, and civilian-agency missions. By design, FFRDCs often receive special access to government facilities, data, sponsor requirements, and sensitive technical information that ordinary private contractors may not receive. This special public-trust role makes records stewardship, sponsor accountability, and congressional visibility especially important.

Congress has already directed the creation of a national UAP Records Collection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Federal agencies have been instructed to identify UAP records in any format, create digital copies, and transfer appropriate records to NARA for inclusion in Record Group 615. MITRE’s role as an FFRDC operator and federal contractor may place MITRE in custody or control of government-funded records, contractor-held federal records, technical datasets, working papers, contract deliverables, metadata, or program records that bear directly on that statutory framework.

This inquiry does not require MITRE to accept any particular conclusion about the origin or nature of UAP. It does require MITRE to identify what it knows, what it holds, what it has held, what it has transferred, what it has destroyed or was directed to destroy, and which federal sponsors or classification authorities control the relevant records. Where MITRE believes another federal agency or sponsor is the proper custodian, MITRE should identify that custodian, the relevant

contract or tasking instrument, the original classification authority, the record schedule, and the current location or disposition of the records.

The Committee’s oversight interests include federal records management, federal procurement, classification accountability, contractor custody of government records, Special Access Program and Controlled Access Program reporting, whistleblower protections, and the implementation of congressional mandates concerning UAP records. These interests fall within the Committee’s investigative and legislative jurisdiction, including the Rules of the House of Representatives and the Committee’s authority to issue subpoenas when necessary. Accordingly, please provide the following:

1. Within five business days, designate a senior MITRE officer at the vice-president level or higher, with counsel available as appropriate, empowered to coordinate preservation, production, sponsor coordination, classification handling, and briefing logistics for this inquiry.

2. Within 10 business days, issue and confirm a written preservation hold covering responsive records and data across MITRE, all MITRE-operated FFRDCs, relevant laboratories, restricted systems, air-gapped environments, classified repositories, personal workspaces used for official business, archived systems, email, collaboration platforms, backup media, contractor/subcontractor systems, and offsite storage.

3. No later than 30 days from the date of this letter, provide written answers to each interrogatory and a records-location index that identifies responsive repositories, custodians, contract vehicles, sponsors, classification authorities, record schedules, and any claimed limitations on MITRE’s ability to produce the records directly.

4. No later than 45 days from the date of this letter, produce all unclassified responsive records in native electronic format, including complete metadata. For classified, controlled unclassified, proprietary, export-controlled, or otherwise restricted materials, provide a segregated classified or restricted annex, a privilege/classification log, and the identity of the federal official or sponsor necessary to authorize review or release.

5. Within 14 days of the date of this letter, contact my office to coordinate a classified briefing for Task Force Members and cleared Committee staff at the appropriate TS/SCI/SAP level. The briefing should include knowledgeable MITRE personnel, records officials, counsel, and sponsor representatives as needed.

For the avoidance of doubt, preservation must include source files, metadata, chain-of-custody records, access logs, audit logs, lab notebooks, analytic work papers, modeling outputs, sensor data, correspondence, memoranda, sponsor communications, security files, classification guides, data dictionaries, indexing records, and records of transfers to or from government agencies, NARA, other FFRDCs, laboratories, prime contractors, subcontractors, or foreign partners. False statements, concealment, alteration, destruction, or obstruction in connection with this inquiry may implicate federal law, including but not limited to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001, 1505, 1512, 1519, and 2071, as applicable.

Classified, controlled, proprietary, privacy-protected, or source-and-method-sensitive information should be segregated and handled through appropriate secure channels; however, classification or sponsor control should not be used to prevent MITRE from identifying the existence, location, sponsor, classification authority, and record-management status of responsive materials to the maximum extent permitted by law.

If MITRE believes supplemental legislation, sponsor direction, declassification action, NARA guidance, or original-classification-authority approval is necessary to complete production, state that specifically and identify the precise legal or contractual impediment, the federal official who can resolve it, and the shortest practical path to lawful disclosure to Congress and transfer to NARA as appropriate.

For staff-level coordination, please contact , Legislative Assistant in my office, at .

Sincerely,

> picture [139 x 39] intentionally omitted <

Eric Burlison Member of Congress

cc: The Honorable Anna Paulina Luna, Chairwoman, Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets

The Honorable James Comer, Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Michael D. Thomas, Director, Information Security Oversight Office, National Archives and Records Administration

Enclosure (1): Legislative Interrogatories and Production Requests to The MITRE Corporation

Enclosure

Legislative Interrogatories and Production Requests to The MITRE Corporation

Definitions and Instructions

For purposes of these requests, “MITRE” means The MITRE Corporation, any MITRE-operated FFRDC, MITRE employees, officers, consultants, agents, detailees, secondees, subcontractors, affiliates, controlled entities, and any person or organization acting on MITRE’s behalf or under MITRE’s direction.

“Responsive records” means all records, data, communications, drafts, analyses, memoranda, notes, briefing materials, reports, contracts, task orders, statements of work, deliverables, models, code, sensor files, metadata, chain-of-custody materials, photographs, video, audio, databases, lab notebooks, audit logs, security records, classification guides, access lists, and any other material in any medium, whether classified, unclassified, controlled unclassified, proprietary, exportcontrolled, archived, legacy, or held by a sponsor, subcontractor, or third party.

“UAP-related” includes records concerning unidentified anomalous phenomena; unidentified aerial, aerospace, maritime, undersea, submerged, orbital, or transmedium objects or events; objects or signatures not readily attributable to known U.S., allied, adversary, commercial, meteorological, astronomical, or natural sources; technologies or materials of unknown origin; recovered anomalous materials; foreign material acquisition or exploitation concerning anomalous aerospace or undersea systems; and any records described, coded, compartmented, or euphemized as involving UAP, UFO, USO, transmedium craft, advanced aerospace threat, technology of unknown origin, non-human intelligence, legacy crash retrieval, crash retrieval, reverse engineering, recovered vehicle, recovered material, biological material, or equivalent terms.

Unless otherwise specified, the relevant time period is January 1, 1930, to the present. If MITRE contends that a request is overbroad for a particular legacy period, identify the earliest date for which MITRE can search reliably, the reason older records cannot be searched, and the custodian or sponsor most likely to hold the older records.

For each request, produce records in native electronic format with metadata. If a record is withheld in whole or in part, provide a log stating the record title or description, date, author, recipient, custodian, sponsor, contract/task order, classification level or control marking, asserted basis for withholding, original classification authority if applicable, and the federal official able to authorize congressional review or public release.

If no responsive records exist, provide a certification describing the search methodology, repositories searched, custodians contacted, search terms used, date ranges, and the responsible MITRE official who supervised the search.

I. Enterprise Search, Records Preservation, and Custody

1. Identify every MITRE office, FFRDC, laboratory, program office, secure facility, restricted network, data lake, archive, storage system, or offsite repository searched for responsive records. For each, provide the custodian, system owner, classification level, date range, sponsor, and search methodology.

2. Provide the written preservation hold issued in response to this inquiry, including the date issued, recipients, systems covered, backup and deletion protocols suspended, and the MITRE official responsible for compliance.

3. Identify all record schedules, contract clauses, data-rights provisions, sponsor instructions, security classification guides, special access instructions, and records-management policies that govern MITRE custody, retention, transfer, destruction, or return of responsive records.

4. Identify any responsive records that MITRE previously transferred to a federal agency, NARA, a sponsor, another FFRDC, a national laboratory, a defense contractor, a subcontractor, a foreign partner, or any private entity. Include dates, chain of custody, transfer authority, receiving entity, and current known location.

5. Identify any responsive records known or believed to have been destroyed, deleted, overwritten, degaussed, redacted, sanitized, reclassified, moved to a restricted system, transferred offsite, placed under sponsor control, or made inaccessible. Include dates, authority, rationale, responsible personnel, and whether a NARA-approved disposition schedule applied.

6. Provide an index of MITRE personnel, former personnel, consultants, detailees, secondees, subcontractors, and sponsor representatives who are reasonably likely to have knowledge of responsive records or programs, including current contact information where available to MITRE.

• II. Contracts, Task Orders, Programs, and Sponsor Relationships

1. Identify all contracts to include, but not be limited to all Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) vehicles, Governmentwide Acquisition Contract (GWAC), Broad Purchase Agreements (BPA), Other Transaction Authorities (OTA), Cooperative Research & Development Agreements (CRADA), Memorandum of Agreement, Memorandum of Understanding, statements of objectives, task orders, statements of work, scopes of work, work packages/projects, sponsor-directed research, independent research and development charging, advisory efforts, systems-engineering projects, data-integration projects, modeling projects, studies, analysis, simulation, emulation, exercises, estimates, forecasts, measurement/signature evaluation, or operational-support activities in which MITRE participated in, supported, managed, stored, indexed, transferred, or briefed any UAP-related information directly or indirectly. Include the names, positions, ranks/titles, and organizations of all individuals involved in any of the requested activities with details of their specific functions and duties in said activities.

2. For each responsive program or tasking, provide the sponsor, contract number, task order, statement of work, period of performance, funding amount or labor charge code, program manager, contracting officer or contracting officer representative, security office, classification level, deliverables, and disposition of records.

3. Identify all UAP-related work performed for or with the Department of Defense, Intelligence Community, Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Aviation Administration, NASA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, or Executive Office of the President.

4. Identify all UAP-related work performed with or for AARO, the UAP Task Force, AATIP, AAWSAP, DIA, CIA, NSA, NRO, NGA, ONI, NRL, DARPA, IARPA, DOE laboratories, service laboratories, combatant commands, or any successor, predecessor, cover, compartment, or renamed activity.

5. Identify any program, project, compartment, or tasking in which MITRE was asked to evaluate, simulate, characterize, red-team, threat-model, exploit, reverse-engineer, or explain anomalous aerospace, undersea, orbital, propulsion, energy, materials, signature-management,

biological, cognitive, or sensor-evasion capabilities attributed to UAP-related objects or systems.

6. Identify any program in which MITRE provided cover, systems-engineering support, classification support, data-management support, facility support, sponsor interface, budgetary support, or technical advice for another entity’s UAP-related work, even if MITRE was not the prime scientific performer.

7. Identify all instances in which MITRE declined, terminated, limited, redirected, or transferred UAP-related work because of legal, safety, ethical, classification, records-management, technical, security, foreign-access, or sponsor-control concerns.

III. Classified Access, Special Programs, and Oversight Visibility

1. Identify all Special Access Programs (SAPs), Controlled Access Programs (CAPs), national programs, Alternative Compensatory Control Measures (ACCMs), Managed-Need-To-Know (MNTK) codewords, DOE Restricted Data/Formerly Restricted Data compartments, SIGMA categories, SAP-like or CAP-like constructs, and other restricted-access mechanisms in which MITRE participated or that MITRE supported in connection with UAP-related records, materials, data, or technology.

2. For each responsive compartment or restricted-access mechanism, identify the sponsor, original classification authority, security classification guide, program nickname or code word if releasable to Congress, start and end dates, access-control authority, congressional reporting channel, and whether the program was reported to the appropriate congressional committees.

3. Identify any responsive program or record that was withheld from ordinary sponsor records systems, federal records officers, NARA transfer processes, Inspectors General, AARO, congressional defense or intelligence committees, or the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee because of SAP, CAP, ACCM, MNTK, proprietary, IRAD, or “need-toknow” restrictions.

4. Identify any classification guide, program-security instruction, nondisclosure agreement, access roster, indoctrination/debriefing record, or sponsor communication that instructed MITRE personnel to avoid use of the terms UAP, UFO, USO, crash retrieval, reverse engineering, technology of unknown origin, non-human intelligence, or similar terms in records or communications.

5. Identify any circumstances in which MITRE was told that responsive records could not be provided to Congress, NARA, an Inspector General, AARO, a federal records officer, or a sponsor records office. Provide the instruction, date, source, legal basis asserted, and current status.

IV. UAP Records Collection, NARA Transfer, and Federal Records Act Compliance

1. Identify all MITRE-held records that may be responsive to sections 1841-1843 of the FY 2024 National Defense Authorization Act and NARA guidance concerning the UAP Records Collection, including any records suitable for Record Group 615.

2. Describe MITRE’s process for identifying contractor-held federal records or contract deliverables that should be returned to a sponsor, transferred to NARA, digitized, indexed, declassified, reviewed for public release, or preserved in connection with the UAP Records Collection.

3. Identify all communications between MITRE and NARA, ISOO, AARO, ODNI, DoD, DOE, DHS, FAA, NASA, or any sponsor concerning UAP records identification, transfer,

declassification, public release, indexing, metadata, digitization, chain-of-custody, or contractor-held records.

4. Identify all responsive records that MITRE has provided to NARA, a federal agency records officer, an original classification authority, ISOO, AARO, an Inspector General, or Congress. Provide transmission dates, cover correspondence, indexes, metadata, and accession or tracking numbers if known.

5. Identify all responsive records MITRE believes should be reviewed for transfer to NARA but has not yet transferred or made available to the appropriate sponsor. Explain what action is needed, by whom, and on what timeline.

6. Identify any contractor, subcontractor, consultant, or private entity that created or retained responsive records under MITRE direction or funding, including whether MITRE has secured preservation and return of those records.

V. Sensor Data, Domain Awareness, and UAP/USO Detection

1. Identify all MITRE work involving the detection, tracking, correlation, characterization, datafusion, anomaly detection, or attribution of UAP-related signatures across air, space, maritime, undersea, cyber, electromagnetic, acoustic, radar, optical, infrared, nuclear, biological, chemical, or multi-intelligence domains.

2. Produce all responsive sensor datasets, derived data products, analytic reports, modeling outputs, software documentation, training datasets, validation data, and briefings concerning UAP-related events, including events characterized as transmedium, high-performance, hardto-attribute, nontraditional, or anomalous.

3. Identify all MITRE work involving Navy, Coast Guard, maritime, undersea, anti-submarine warfare, sonar, acoustic, SOSUS/IUSS-related, unmanned-undersea, or airborne ASW sensor systems that detected, tracked, attempted to identify, or archived records concerning unidentified submerged objects, anomalous underwater events, or transmedium objects.

4. For each responsive UAP/USO detection or analysis event, provide the event date, location or region if releasable, platform or sensor type, sponsoring unit or agency, analytic conclusion, confidence level, data disposition, and whether records were provided to AARO, ONI, ODNI, NARA, a combatant command, or Congress.

5. Identify all instances in which MITRE developed tools, ontologies, taxonomies, databases, data standards, AI/ML models, or automated triage methods for identifying anomalous aerospace, undersea, or transmedium events.

6. If MITRE cannot produce specific operational data because it is controlled by a sponsor, identify the sponsor, system, data owner, classification authority, and the procedure necessary for congressional review.

VI. Materials, Technology Exploitation, Biological Records, and Health/Safety Data

1. Identify all instances in which MITRE received, analyzed, stored, modeled, transported, transferred, advised on, or maintained records concerning recovered anomalous materials, technologies of unknown origin, alleged UAP-derived material, foreign material acquisition or exploitation material, or material whose origin, composition, performance, isotope ratio, manufacturing method, or chain of custody was considered anomalous or unresolved.

2. For each responsive material or technology record, provide the chain of custody, sponsor, date received, analytical methods, laboratories used, test results, conclusions, classification markings, safety controls, disposition, and current custodian.

3. Identify all MITRE work involving reverse engineering, exploitation, technical assessment, vulnerability analysis, propulsion analysis, energy systems, materials science, metamaterials, isotope analysis, biological compatibility, radiation effects, signature management, stealth, sensor evasion, or cognitive interface systems associated with UAP-related materials or systems.

4. Identify any responsive records concerning biological material, biological samples, human physiological effects, medical monitoring, occupational exposure, anomalous injury, cognitive or neurological effects, or environmental hazards associated with UAP-related materials, objects, fields, occupants, or events. This request seeks records and safety documentation only and does not presume the validity of any particular biological claim.

5. Identify any institutional review board, biosafety, radiation safety, human-subjects, occupational health, legal, ethics, or security review associated with responsive materials, biological records, or health/safety data.

6. Identify any third-party laboratories, universities, national laboratories, medical entities, or contractors that performed analysis, storage, testing, chain-of-custody support, or safety review for responsive materials or biological/health records under MITRE sponsorship, direction, or coordination.

VII. Facilities, Secure Environments, and Physical Custody

1. Identify all MITRE facilities, sponsor facilities, leased spaces, secure rooms, SCIFs, SAPFs, laboratories, vaults, restricted-access spaces, air-gapped systems, special storage locations, test ranges, or offsite archives used to store, process, analyze, brief, or transfer responsive records, data, materials, or technology.

2. For each facility or secure environment, provide the location, sponsor, security level, dates of use, purpose, access-control authority, responsible security officer, relevant accreditation records, and whether the facility held federal records or contract deliverables responsive to this inquiry.

3. Identify any facility or storage location jointly used with a federal agency, national laboratory, FFRDC, defense contractor, subcontractor, foreign government, foreign laboratory, university, or intelligence partner for responsive work.

4. Identify any construction, modification, shielding, special power, environmental controls, secure communications, compartmented storage, or material-containment work performed for responsive records, materials, or programs.

5. Identify access logs, visitor logs, material-control logs, courier records, vault inventories, dataingest logs, and audit records associated with responsive facilities or secure environments.

VIII. Whistleblowers, Internal Reports, Non-Disclosure Instruments, and Retaliation Concerns

1. Identify all internal disclosures, ethics complaints, security reports, legal memoranda, Inspector General referrals, employee concerns, or sponsor communications in which MITRE personnel, subcontractors, consultants, or detailees reported UAP-related records, programs, materials, anomalous observations, concealment, records destruction, retaliation, or improper classification.

2. Identify all nondisclosure agreements, special acknowledgments, SAP or CAP indoctrination forms, employee directives, sponsor instructions, or other instruments beyond standard government-secrecy obligations that restricted MITRE personnel from reporting UAP-related

matters to Congress, Inspectors General, AARO, NARA, federal law enforcement, or appropriate cleared oversight officials.

3. Identify any MITRE personnel, former personnel, subcontractors, or consultants who provided UAP-related information to Congress, Inspectors General, AARO, federal law enforcement, agency records officers, or investigative bodies. Provide MITRE’s response, any legal position taken, and any employment, clearance, access, contractual, or administrative action taken.

4. Identify any allegation, investigation, or incident involving intimidation, adverse personnel action, clearance/access action, removal from program, contract termination, threat referral, or security inquiry related to UAP-related disclosures or records concerns.

5. Provide MITRE policies and training materials governing employee communications with Congress, Inspectors General, AARO, NARA, agency records officers, law enforcement, and sponsor oversight offices concerning classified or sensitive matters.

IX. Third-Party Relationships, Transfers, and Contractor Custody

1. Identify all UAP-related partnerships, subcontracts, memoranda of understanding, cooperative research agreements, interagency agreements, university agreements, laboratory agreements, nondisclosure agreements, or data-use agreements involving MITRE and any defense contractor, FFRDC, national laboratory, university, nonprofit, foreign partner, or private entity.

2. Identify any UAP-related work involving Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon/RRTX, Boeing, General Dynamics, SAIC, Leidos, Battelle, The Aerospace Corporation, Booz Allen Hamilton, BAE Systems, Bigelow Aerospace or its successors/affiliates, or any other aerospace, defense, intelligence, science, engineering, biomedical, or materials-analysis entity.

3. Identify all transfers of responsive records, materials, data, samples, hardware, software, models, or custody information to or from any third party. Include dates, authority, sponsor, chain of custody, data rights, IP/data-protection terms, and current location.

4. Identify any responsive records held under independent research and development, proprietary, trade-secret, internal research, limited-rights, government-purpose-rights, export-control, or sponsor-proprietary markings. Explain why such markings do or do not affect congressional access or NARA-transfer obligations.

5. Identify any foreign government, foreign laboratory, foreign university, foreign corporation, or foreign national access to responsive records, materials, data, facilities, or programs, including security approvals, export-control determinations, and counterintelligence reviews.

X. Budgeting, Funding, and Contracting Controls

1. Identify all funding sources, program elements, project numbers, charge codes, contract line items, sponsor accounts, reimbursable agreements, IRAD charges, overhead charges, or discretionary research funds used for responsive work.

2. Identify all instances in which responsive work was funded through a cover program, broader systems-engineering task, threat-emulation activity, materials-analysis task, foreign material exploitation activity, aviation safety project, sensor-fusion effort, counterintelligence activity, biomedical or health-effects study, nuclear/materials characterization project, or other activity whose public description differed materially from the responsive work performed.

3. Identify any responsive funding that MITRE understood to be hidden from, not briefed to, or not readily visible to ordinary sponsor budget channels, Defense or Intelligence

authorizers/appropriators, congressional notification processes, or federal records and procurement officials.

4. Provide all audit findings, internal reviews, sponsor reviews, Inspector General communications, corrective-action plans, or third-party assessments concerning responsive funding, contract compliance, security, records retention, sponsor reporting, or oversight visibility.

XI. Corrective Action, Legislative Needs, and Certification

1. Identify any legal, contractual, classification, sponsor-control, proprietary, export-control, privacy, data-rights, records-management, or technical obstacle that prevents MITRE from producing responsive records to Congress or making them available for NARA transfer and public-release review.

2. For each obstacle, identify the federal official, sponsor, original classification authority, contracting officer, records officer, counsel, or other decision maker able to resolve it, and provide MITRE’s proposed timeline and recommended remedy.

3. Identify any legislative amendments, appropriations language, contract clauses, NARA guidance, ISOO guidance, declassification procedures, sponsor instructions, or whistleblowerprotection measures MITRE believes are necessary to ensure complete identification, preservation, congressional review, and lawful public release of responsive UAP records.

4. Provide a certified response signed by a responsible MITRE officer and counsel stating that MITRE has conducted a reasonable and good-faith search, preserved responsive records, produced or logged responsive materials, identified sponsor-controlled records, and disclosed any known destruction, transfer, or withholding of responsive records.