With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the language of the Act itself and the intent behind the words, we find that the documents sought by Appellant Williams were “records” within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. § 552a(a)(4). B. Whether these records were within the DVA’s “system of records” and thus sub-jeet to the Act’s access provision is a much more difficult problem. Courts have construed § 552a(a)(5) narrowly. See, e.g., Henke v. United States Dep’t of Commerce, 88 F.3d 1453, 1459-61 (D.C.Cir.1996) (finding that retrieval capability is not the test since Congress’s use of the words ‘is retrieved’ “suggest[s] strongly that a group of records should generally (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1078, 101 S.Ct. 858, 66 L.Ed.2d 801 (1981); Smiertka v. United States Dep’t of Treasury, 447 F.Supp. 221, 228-29 (D.D.C.1978) (<HOLDING>), vacated and remanded on other grounds, 604

A: holding that warrants of deportation were properly characterized as nontestimonial official records that were prepared independent of this litigation and were not prepared to prove facts for use in future criminal prosecutions
B: holding that records relating to a student court were not education records
C: holding that daily reports prepared by agency investigator were not records within a system of records since they were retrievable by the investigators identifier and not accessed by plaintiffs name
D: holding that a database of email messages is not a system of records under the privacy act because it is not indexed by personal identifier
C.