(concurring in the result):
I concur with the majority. United States v. Shields, 20 M.J. 174 (C.M.A.1985), extended the logic of United States v. Strong, 17 M.J. 263 (C.M.A.1984), further than I would have done. I would have limited Strong to the cross-examination of a witness and not extended it to documentary evidence prepared in accordance with departmental directives.