WASHINGTON (AP) — The State Department provided more detail Saturday about a 2011 document at the center of Hillary Clinton’s latest email controversy, as an official said the former secretary of state never received the paper by nonsecure fax. But many other questions remained unanswered.

FILE - In this Jan. 7, 2016 file photo, Democratic presidential hopeful former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks in San Gabriel, Calif. The State Department released Friday another 3,000 pages of emails from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email account, missing a court-ordered goal for their production by a week. (AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes, File)

FILE – In this Jan. 7, 2016 file photo, Democratic presidential hopeful former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks in San Gabriel, Calif. The State Department released Friday another 3,000 pages of emails from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email account, missing a court-ordered goal for their production by a week. (AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes, File)

Clinton, whose presidential campaign has been challenged by her use of a private email account while secretary of state, is facing questions anew after Friday’s revelation that she asked an adviser to go around a secure fax system to transmit a set of “talking points” on an unspecified subject.

Clinton told the adviser to turn it “into nonpaper w/no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” Republicans immediately pounced on the exchange and suggested it proved impropriety.

The State Department said Friday that no such document was sent by email.

And on Saturday, a State Department official who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly on the increasingly complicated review of Clinton’s emails said the agency “checked its records and found no indication that the document in question was sent to Secretary Clinton using nonsecure fax or email.”

The official, who demanded anonymity, said records instead turned up a secure fax transmission shortly after Clinton’s email exchange with adviser Jake Sullivan on June 17, 2011. The implication was that this was the same document.

While the review appears to rule out the possibility of Clinton improperly receiving sensitive material, it leaves other questions unanswered.