National Archives Clarifies When Federal AI Materials Are Records

The National Archives has issued guidance clarifying when material created or used through artificial-intelligence systems may have to be treated as a federal record.

The memorandum, AC 11.2026, is dated August 21, 2026, and was sent to federal agency records officers and other officials responsible for records management. It explains how agencies should apply the Federal Records Act to AI prompts, outputs, data, audit trails, software and related materials.

The memorandum is records-management guidance, not a new AI statute or formal regulation. NARA said it addresses the Federal Records Act only and does not establish broader policy on AI governance, privacy, security, ethics or e-discovery.

AI use alone does not create a federal record

The central point is that using an AI platform does not automatically create a federal record. The question is how the agency created, maintained and used the material and whether it has evidentiary or informational value for government business.

NARA says agencies should consider whether the material was used for official business, relied on in decision-making, circulated to other employees, incorporated into an agency system, subject to agency control or needed to satisfy legal or business obligations.

Information passively retained by a third-party platform is not necessarily received by an agency. NARA says it generally becomes more relevant to federal-record analysis when the agency downloads, captures or otherwise brings the material into an agency system and uses it for official purposes.

Unused AI research results and uncirculated notes kept only for personal convenience may be treated as non-records. Commercial applications such as ChatGPT or Gemini are not automatically federal records simply because an agency employee used them.

What may qualify for preservation

Potentially covered materials include prompts or queries captured in an agency system and used for official purposes, AI-generated meeting summaries circulated to employees, and outputs saved in an agency system and used in government work.

NARA also identifies audit trails as potentially important. An audit trail kept only to refresh an employee’s memory may be a personal file. But if an agency captures and uses the trail in an investigation or another official matter, it can become part of the federal record for that case.

Other potentially covered materials include procurement and operational documentation for AI systems, copies of agency records used to train AI, algorithms and models, and software created or significantly modified by an agency or a contractor acting on its behalf.

Disposal still requires an approved schedule

When AI-related material meets the definition of a federal record, an agency cannot delete it simply because it came from a chatbot or another automated system. NARA says disposal must follow a NARA-approved general or agency-specific records schedule.

Some records may have short retention periods. A transitory record needed for less than 180 days and not needed for financial or legal obligations may be destroyed when it is no longer needed. An intermediary record used to create a later record may be destroyed after that subsequent record is created, if the applicable schedule allows it.

For other material, the schedule depends on the resulting work product. If AI helps create an email, the email schedule applies. If it helps produce a final report, the relevant report schedule applies. NARA says the fact that AI was used is secondary to the function and value of the resulting record.

NARA said existing schedules may authorize destruction of some AI-related records. It is also considering updates for records involving AI policy and AI-training data; in the meantime, agencies may seek agency-specific schedules for authority to dispose of those records.

Why this matters to the public

The guidance gives FOIA requesters, journalists, inspectors general and litigants a clearer vocabulary for asking how an agency used AI in a decision. A request might need to identify prompts, model outputs, meeting summaries, audit trails or records associated with a particular AI system or case.

Preservation does not guarantee public access. Whether material is a federal record and whether it must be disclosed are separate questions. Records may still be withheld under FOIA exemptions, classification rules, privacy protections or other legal restrictions.

The immediate next step is implementation inside individual agencies. NARA says agencies should incorporate records-management requirements into their AI policies, processes and file plans. Agencies will have to determine, based on their own business practices, which AI materials are records and how existing schedules apply.

Sources

Look for updates to this story

Discover more from Interactive News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.